RESUMO
Aggression and violence are common day to day problems in psychiatric settings. However, the optimal means of assessing that risk remains unclear. In the context of that uncertainty many tools have evolved, among which the HCR-20 is one of the most globally accepted, though many questions remain about its performance, how and when it should be deployed and how it can be most effectively used. In this 12 month follow up study of 210 forensic psychiatric inpatients with a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder we explored these issues. We found that the performance of the HCR-20v3, especially its Total score, performed well up to 6 months after it was rated but its performance deteriorated after that. Repeating the HCR-20v3 at 6 months stabilised the risk assessment and led to improved performance in the second months over and above the first rating. The HCR-20v3 was good at identifying those subjects at low risk of violence over 6 months of follow up in a forensic inpatient setting. The real-world implications of this study are that the HCR-20v3 is an effective means of identifying patient at low risk of violence, but it should be reassessed every 6 months.
Assuntos
Pacientes Internados , Violência , Humanos , Masculino , Violência/psicologia , Feminino , Adulto , Pacientes Internados/estatística & dados numéricos , Psiquiatria Legal/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição de Risco/métodos , Escalas de Graduação Psiquiátrica/normas , Seguimentos , Esquizofrenia/diagnóstico , Agressão , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Adulto Jovem , Fatores de Tempo , Psicologia do EsquizofrênicoRESUMO
Background: Scalable psychological interventions such as the WHO's Self-Help Plus (SH+) have been developed for clinical and non-clinical populations in need of psychological support. SH+ has been successfully implemented to prevent common mental disorders among asylum seekers and refugees who are growing in number due to increasing levels of forced migration. These populations are often exposed to multiple, severe sources of traumatisation, and evidence of the effect of such events on treatment is insufficient, especially for non-clinical populations.Objective: We aim to study the effect of potentially traumatic experiences (PTEs) and the mediating role of symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) on the improvement following SH+.Method: Participants allocated to SH+ who received at least three sessions (N = 345) were extracted from two large, randomised, European prevention trials involving asylum seekers and refugees. Measures of distress, depression, functional impairment, and post-traumatic stress symptoms were administered at baseline and 6 months post-intervention, together with measures of well-being and quality of life. Adjusted models were constructed to examine the effect of PTEs on post-intervention improvement. The possible mediating role of PTSD symptoms in this relationship was then tested.Results: Increasing numbers of PTEs decreased the beneficial effect of SH+ for all measures. This relationship was mediated by symptoms of PTSD when analysing measures of well-being and quality of life. However, this did not apply for measures of mental health problems.Conclusions: Exposure to PTEs may largely reduce benefits from SH+. PTSD symptomatology plays a specific, mediating role on psychological well-being and quality of life of participants who experienced PTE. Healthcare professionals and researchers should consider the role of PTEs and PTSD symptoms in the treatment of migrants and refugees and explore possible feasible add-on solutions for cases exposed to multiple PTEs.
Increasing numbers of potentially traumatic experiences can decrease the beneficial effect of a manualized group psychotherapeutic intervention in migrants and refugees across multiple countries.In absence of a full threshold diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, post-traumatic stress symptoms still mediate the relation between potentially traumatic experiences and some outcome improvements at follow-up.While the moderating role of number of potentially traumatic experiences applies to all outcomes (depression symptoms, psychological distress, functional impairment, well-being, and quality of life), the mediating role of post-traumatic stress symptoms in this relation only applies to well-being and quality of life.
Assuntos
Refugiados , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos , Humanos , Refugiados/psicologia , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/terapia , Transtornos de Estresse Pós-Traumáticos/psicologia , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Intervenção Psicossocial , Qualidade de Vida/psicologiaRESUMO
Background: Stigma related to mental illness (and its treatment) is prevalent worldwide. This stigma could be at the structural or organizational level, societal level (interpersonal stigma), and the individual level (internalized stigma). Vulnerable populations, for example, gender minorities, children, adolescents, and geriatric populations, are more prone to stigma. The magnitude of stigma and its negative influence is determined by socio-cultural factors and macro (mental health policies, programs) or micro-level factors (societal views, health sectors, or individuals' attitudes towards mentally ill persons). Mental health stigma is associated with more serious psychological problems among the victims, reduced access to mental health care, poor adherence to treatment, and unfavorable outcomes. Although various nationwide and well-established anti-stigma interventions/campaigns exist in high-income countries (HICs) with favorable outcomes, a comprehensive synthesis of literature from the Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), more so from the Asian continent is lacking. The lack of such literature impedes growth in stigma-related research, including developing anti-stigma interventions. Aim: To synthesize the available mental health stigma literature from Asia and LMICs and compare them on the mental health stigma, anti-stigma interventions, and the effectiveness of such interventions from HICs. Materials and Methods: PubMed and Google Scholar databases were screened using the following search terms: stigma, prejudice, discrimination, stereotype, perceived stigma, associate stigma (for Stigma), mental health, mental illness, mental disorder psychiatric* (for mental health), and low-and-middle-income countries, LMICs, High-income countries, and Asia, South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation/SAARC (for countries of interest). Bibliographic and grey literature were also performed to obtain the relevant records. Results: The anti-stigma interventions in Asia nations and LMICs are generalized (vs. disorder specific), population-based (vs. specific groups, such as patients, caregivers, and health professionals), mostly educative (vs. contact-based or attitude and behavioral-based programs), and lacking in long-term effectiveness data. Government, international/national bodies, professional organizations, and mental health professionals can play a crucial in addressing mental health stigma. Conclusion: There is a need for a multi-modal intervention and multi-sectoral coordination to mitigate the mental health stigma. Greater research (nationwide surveys, cultural determinants of stigma, culture-specific anti-stigma interventions) in this area is required.
RESUMO
Refugees are at increased risk for developing psychological impairments due to stressors in the pre-, peri- and post-migration periods. There is limited knowledge on how everyday functioning is affected by migration experience. In a secondary analysis of a study in a sample of refugees and asylum seekers, it was examined how aspects of psychological functioning were differentially affected. 1,101 eligible refugees and asylum seekers in Europe and Türkiye were included in a cross-sectional analysis. Gender, age, education, number of relatives and children living nearby, as well as indicators for depressive and posttraumatic symptoms, quality of life, psychological well-being and functioning, and lifetime potentially traumatic events were assessed. Correlations and multiple regression models with World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) 12-item version's total and six subdomains' scores ('mobility', 'life activities', 'cognition', 'participation', 'self-care', 'getting along') as dependent variables were calculated. Tests for multicollinearity and Bonferroni correction were applied. Participants reported highest levels of impairment in 'mobility' and 'participation', followed by 'life activities' and 'cognition'. Depression and posttraumatic symptoms were independently associated with overall psychological functioning and all subdomains. History of violence and abuse seemed to predict higher impairment in 'participation', while past events of being close to death were associated with fewer issues with 'self-care'. Impairment in psychological functioning in asylum seekers and refugees was related to current psychological symptoms. Mobility and participation issues may explain difficulties arising after resettlement in integration and exchange with host communities in new contexts.
RESUMO
Background: Consent to treatment is a cornerstone of medical ethics and law. Nevertheless, very little empirical evidence is available to inform clinicians and policymakers regarding the capacities of forensic patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSDs) to make decisions about their treatment, with the risk of clinical and legal inertia, silent coercion, stigmatization, or ill-conceived reforms. Study Design: In this multinational study, we assessed and compared with treatment-related decisional capacities in forensic and non-forensic patients with SSD. 160 forensic and 139 non-forensic patients were used in Austria, Germany, Italy, Poland, and England. Their capacity to consent to treatment was assessed by means of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Multiple generalized linear regression models were used to identify the socio-demographic and clinical variables associated with MacCAT-T scores. Study Results: In total, 55 forensic (34.4%) and 58 non-forensic patients (41.7%) showed high treatment-related decisional capacity, defined as scoring ≥75% of the maximum scores for the understanding, appreciation and reasoning, and 2 for expressing a choice. Forensic patients showed differences in their capacity to consent to treatment across countries. Of all socio-demographic and clinical variables, only "social support" was directly relevant to policy. Conclusions: Forensic patients have treatment-related decisional capacities comparable with their non-forensic counterparts. Social contacts might provide a substantial contribution towards enhancing the decisional autonomy of both forensic and non-forensic patients, hence improving the overall quality and legitimacy of mental health care.
RESUMO
A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Seção de Psiquiatria da Pessoa Idosa da Associação Mundial de Psiquiatria (AMP), em colaboração com um grupo interdisciplinar de representantes das principais associações internacionais e organizações não-governamentais implicadas na saúde mental das pessoas idosas, publicaram três declarações técnicas de consenso sobre a psiquiatria da pessoa idosa (1), a organização dos cuidados em psiquiatria da pessoa idosa (2) e o ensino da psiquiatria da pessoa idosa (3). O Dia Mundial da Saúde 2001, cujo tema foi "Não à exclusão, sim aos cuidados", deu origem a uma nova reunião de consenso sobre o tema da estigmatização e discriminação das pessoas idosas com transtornos mentais. Essa nova reunião foi realizada em Lausanne nos dias 8 e 9 de outubro de 2001 e produziu uma declaração técnica de consenso. O texto inicial foi publicado pela OMS e AMP em inglês. Este artigo apresenta a versão em português desse documento.
This technical consensus statement is jointly produced by the Old Age Psychiatry section of the World Psychiatric Association and the World Health Organization, with the collaboration of several NGOs and the participation of experts from different regions. It is intended to be a tool for (i) promoting debate at all levels on the stigmatization of older people with mental disorders; (ii) outlining the nature, causes and consequences of this stigmatization; and (iii) promoting and suggesting policies, programs and actions to combat this stigmatization.