A nationwide evaluation study of the quality of care and respect of human rights in mental health facilities in Ghana: results from the World Health Organization QualityRights initiative.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, Ghana ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and enacted a Mental Health Act to improve the quality of mental health care and stop human rights violations against people with mental health conditions. In line with these objectives, Ghanaian stakeholders collected data on the quality of mental health services and respect for human rights in psychiatric facilities to identify challenges and gather useful information for the development of plans aimed to improve the quality of the services offered. This study aimed to assess psychiatric facilities from different Ghanaian regions and provide evidence on the quality of care and respect of human rights in mental health services. METHODS: Assessments were conducted by independent visiting committees that collected data through observation, review of documentation, and interviews with service users, staff, and carers, and provided scores using the World Health Organization QualityRights Toolkit methodology. RESULTS: This study revealed significant key challenges in the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities principles in Ghanaian psychiatric services. The rights to an adequate standard of living and enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health were not fully promoted. Only initial steps had been taken to guarantee the right to exercise legal capacity and the right to personal liberty and security. Significant gaps in the promotion of the right to live independently and be included in the community were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies shortcomings and critical areas that the Ghanaian government and facilities need to target for implementing a human rights-based approach in mental health and improve the quality of mental health care throughout the country.

Towards Establishing Quality Standards on Human Rights for Services in Dementia Care.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia often experience violations of fundamental human rights and impeded access to healthcare. This study aims to investigate the views of experts regarding the use of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD) principles as quality standards for human rights-based care. METHODS: A single-round Delphi e-consultation with 15 dementia experts was designed to evaluate each CRPD principle and collect feedback on their views about the application of the CRPD principles in dementia care. RESULTS: The CRPD principles were fully endorsed as quality standards; however, several experts commented on the complexities of the use of CRPD principles in relation to information disclosure, capacity assessment, stakeholders' involvement in decision-making, respecting needs and preferences, holistic approaches in care practice, and protection against abuse, neglect and discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate the CRPD quality standards were fully applicable for people with dementia although some clarification around interpretation could assist in their use. Future research should elaborate on further points of support and guidance for dementia care providing examples of good practice from across the globe, and develop a concordant, human rights-based scheme for the implementation and evaluation of dementia services. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study suggests that the CRPD can serve as a benchmark for human rights-based practices in dementia services globally that could enhance nursing care practice. Nursing staff are encouraged to consider human rights in relation to the complexities associated with people with dementia, their caregivers, and other services involved in their care.

Evaluating the psychometric properties of three WHO instruments to assess knowledge about human rights, attitudes toward persons with mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities, and practices related to substitute decision-making and coercion in mental health.

Background: Instruments to assess the knowledge about the rights of persons with mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities, the attitudes toward their role as rights holders, and mental health professionals' practices related to substitute decision-making and coercion are either missing or lack evaluation of their validity and reliability. Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of three instruments developed to fill this gap in the literature, the World Health Organization's QualityRights (WHO QR) Knowledge questionnaire, the WHO QR Attitudes questionnaire, and the WHO QR Practices questionnaire. Methods: A sample of participants was recruited and completed an online survey. Content validity and face validity were assessed for the three questionnaires. Based on the characteristics of the questionnaires, different approaches were used to assess their construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis, known group validity, and convergent and divergent validity). Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and test re-test reliability using Pearson's and Spearman's r coefficients. Results: The analyses conducted indicate that the three questionnaires are valid and reliable instruments to evaluate the knowledge about the rights of persons with mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities, the attitudes toward their role as rights holders, and mental health professionals' practices related to substitute decision-making and coercion. Conclusion: This finding lends support to the use of these instruments both within mental health services and in the general population for a better understanding of current knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to a human rights-based approach to mental health in mental health services and the community.

Disability and COVID-19: ensuring no one is left behind.

The United Nations' Sustainable Development Agenda calls for targeted attention to the needs and rights of the most vulnerable populations to ensure a life of dignity and human security for all. In this paper, we argue that persons with disabilities are in a disproportionately vulnerable situation in public health emergencies. By using the example of Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), we explain why that is and call for the systematic consideration of the needs and rights of persons with disabilities during the response to the outbreak and during the recovery phase. Otherwise, equity will continue to be merely an aspiration during this COVID-19 emergency - as it will in future health emergencies.