Impact of shared mental health care in the general population on subjects’ perceptions of mental health care and on mental health status

Objective A community survey evaluated whether the development of a shared mental health care intervention had an impact on health care perceptions and mental health status of subjects with common mental health problems (MHP). Methods Adults <70 years old with common MHP (DSM-IV/CIDI-SF major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety or MHI-SF 36 psychic distress diagnoses), were randomly drawn from the general population in the intervention area (IA, n = 349) and in a control area (CA, n = 360), and evaluated twice at an interval of 18 months (percentage of follow-up: IA = 69.3%, CA = 71.9%, P = .44). CA and IA groups did not differ for the criteria of interest at baseline. Results At 18 months, compared to CA, IA reported significantly different help-seeking attitudes or behaviours (P = .02 for all subjects and .006 for subjects with current MHP) and greater general satisfaction with care (P = .03 for both). Remission rates and daily life functioning did not differ. Conclusions After 4 years of development of a mental health network based on a consultation-liaison model, Shared Mental Health Care was associated with greater satisfaction and access with care among subjects with common MHP. The association was not found with mental health status, but the study lacked power to adequately address the issues.     

What kinds of skills are needed to develop the outreach services in the context of community-based mental health?

Outreach services in the context of a policy, "from hospital based to community based", are intended to know more about community living situation of patients, and provide supports so that they can bring their life back as citizens. Therefore, these outreach services are completely different from traditional monitoring based outreach services. These supports require skills which are different from those in psychiatric hospitals. Those differences would be visible in terms of skills because staff will be exposed to "life" of patients. Furthermore, those differences in skills would come up from necessity of facing negative feeling of people who receive outreach services often have toward medical care and support. Based on this standpoint, the author proposed tentative plan which divided necessary skills for outreach into five phases from the viewpoint of the training as follows: Level 1: Shifting perspectives from illness management to community living based, Level 2: Knowing their living situations and strengths. Building trusting relationship as staying present to the person. Level 3: Staying on top of skills in strength model, case management, and psychoeducation. Level 4: Being able to work in a team setting smoothly. Level 5: Even if the paternalism is necessary in the particular situation, staff needs to be able to face that situation without escaping. In addition, the author called the attitude of psychiatric facilities toward community psychiatry as "regionalization" and divided "regionalization" into six stages while showing necessary skills for each stage.     

What drives changes in institutionalised mental health care? A qualitative study of the perspectives of professional experts

Background

Since 1990, the provision of mental healthcare has changed substantially across Western Europe. There are fewer psychiatric hospital beds and more places in forensic psychiatric hospitals and residential facilities. However, little research has investigated the drivers behind these changes. This study explored qualitatively the perspectives of mental health professional experts on what has driven the changes in Western Europe.

Methods

In-depth interviews were conducted with twenty-four mental health experts in England, Germany and Italy, who as professionals had personal experiences of the changes in their country. Interviewees were asked about drivers of changes in institutionalised mental health care from 1990 to 2010. The accounts were subjected to a thematic analysis.

Results

Four broad themes were revealed: the overall philosophy of de-institutionalisation, with the aim to overcome old-fashioned asylum style care; finances, with a pressure to limit expenditure and an interest of provider organisations to increase income; limitations of community mental health care in which most severely ill patients may be neglected; and emphasis on risk containment so that patients posing a risk may be cared for in institutions. Whilst all themes were mentioned in all three countries, there were also differences in emphasis and detail.

Conclusions

Distinct factors appear to have influenced changes in mental health care. Their precise influence may vary from country to country, and they have to be considered in the context of each country. The drivers may be influenced by professional groups to some extent, but also depend on the overall interest and attitudes in the society at large.

     

Architecture signifying social control: the restoration of asylumdom in mental health care?

Prior to the era of community care, the asylum has been an architectural manifestation of the power of psychiatry and the State. Asylumdom was a period in which custodial warehouses were used by the State to store sections of the population considered to be 'unreasonable'. There are signs, however, of a re-birth of asylumdom in both the UK and Australia. For example, there is a projected growth in the number of 'secure units' in the community, and a growing concern with issues of security and risk management in mental health care. Furthermore, new technologies for containment and surveillance are being installed in acute inpatient psychiatric units. Once again the asylum will symbolize emphatically the authority of the State (and its agencies of social control), and re-emphasize the exclusion of 'unreason' from the 'reasonable' society.     

Which mental disorders are associated with the greatest impairment in functioning?

Objective

The objective of this study is to estimate the comparative associations of mental disorders with three measures of functional impairment: the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF); the number of days in the past 12 months of total inability to work or carry out normal activities because of emotions, nerves, or mental health (i.e., days out of role); and a modified version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0).

Methods

Secondary data analysis of the linked Mental Health Surveillance Study and the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (n?=?5653), nationally representative population surveys conducted in the United States. Generalized linear models assessed the independent effects of mental disorders on each measure of functional impairment, controlling for mental disorder comorbidity, physical health disorders, and sociodemographic factors.

Results

The results varied across measures of functional impairment. However, mood disorders generally tended to be associated with the greatest functional impairment, anxiety disorders with intermediate impairment, and substance use disorders with the least impairment. All 15 disorders were significantly associated with the GAF score in multiple regression models, eight disorders were significantly associated with the WHODAS score, and three disorders were significantly associated with days out of role.

Conclusions

Our results highlight the value of complementary measures of functional impairment.

     

Change in the mental health field?

An analysis of the current roles of the federally funded community mental health center and the public mental hospital suggests that despite the rhetoric about a community mental health revolution, the mental health field has yet to undergo significant change. Ideological, political, economic, and structural barriers-characteristics of the field itself-impede such change outside, inside, and across the centers and hospitals. Recent court decisions on patients' rights, however, have the potential for moving the field into a period where bold new action actually can occur.Preparation of this paper was supported, in part, by Research Grant No. 1 R01 MH23646 from the National Institute of Mental Health. The authors thank Al Imershein, Kent Miller, and Elane Nuehring for helpful comments on an earlier draft.     

What do mental health professionals really think of family members of mental health patients?

Mental health professionals working at three rural public community mental health agencies were asked for their views on the families of mental health patients. Findings revealed themes that included families as supportive caregivers, as unsupportive agitators, as in pain, as uninformed, and as unequal partners. Implications for clinical intervention, education, and research are discussed.     

What is the effectiveness of acute hospital treatment of older people with mental disorders?

AIM: To appraise the effectiveness of acute hospital service delivery in old age psychiatry. METHOD: A systematic literature search of the Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and Cochrane Collaboration databases was undertaken to obtain articles published in English from 1966 to May 2004 about old age psychiatry services. Articles were excluded if they did not focus on subjects over 60 years of age, did not include quantitative data on outcomes, or if the intervention was purely pharmacological or a specific non-pharmacological technique. The two authors independently assessed data quality. The overall quality of the evidence for the effectiveness of old age mental health service delivery was rated on an evidence hierarchy that has four levels of evidence. RESULTS: Forty-six studies were identified that met our criteria. The only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were of consultation/liaison service provision and delirium prevention and hence the best quality evidence is for interventions to prevent delirium, reduce costs and length of stay (LOS) in medical wards (level II). There is lower quality (level III/IV), albeit consistently positive, evidence that acute hospital treatment by old age psychiatry services is effective. By contrast, there is no evidence (level I) that non-psychiatric hospital medical services improve mental health outcomes. CONCLUSION: There are gaps in our knowledge regarding the effectiveness of acute hospital treatment of mental disorders in old age. Multicenter studies involving comparisons of day hospitals, multidisciplinary community teams and acute hospital settings (old age mental health and adult mental health, with and without post-discharge community care) are required.