RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Tasmania has the most rurally and remotely dispersed population of young people in Australia with high rates of youth experiencing mental ill health and socioeconomic disadvantage. Standard descriptions of mental healthcare provision are necessary for evidence-informed mental healthcare policy, planning and implementation. This systematic scoping study aimed to: (1) map and describe the characteristics of community-based youth mental health services (including substance-use) for young people in Tasmania, Australia and (2) identify gaps in service accessibility and provision. METHODS: A list of eligible services was developed through a systematic search and consultation with key stakeholders. Data were collected from a representative from each eligible service via an interview or online survey. A standardised framework was used to classify, describe and map services. Thematic analysis was used to analyse service providers' perceived gaps to service access and provision. RESULTS: Twenty-eight community-based mental health services for youth were identified, predominantly located in the major city of Tasmania's three service regions. Service gaps include the 'missing middle', lack of integrated supports and limited service capacity. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the limited availability, accessibility and capacity of youth mental health services across Tasmania. Recommendations focus on increasing accessibility of rural/regional supports, provision of assertive outreach, psychosocial support, integrated care and strengthening the rural mental health workforce. These findings may inform the (re)design/(re)development of community-based youth mental health services in Tasmania. The findings may also guide evidence-informed mental health service planning, decision-making, development and implementation of integrated models of youth mental health care across Australia.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There has been limited focus on understanding the barriers and facilitators to meeting the broader psychosocial needs of young people with mental illness from the perspectives of young people. This is required to advance the local evidence base and inform service design and development. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore young people's (10-25 years) and carers' experiences of mental health services, focusing on barriers and facilitators to services supporting young people's psychosocial functioning. METHODS: This study was conducted throughout 2022 in Tasmania, Australia. Young people with lived experience of mental illness were involved in all stages of this research. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 young people aged 10-25 years with experience of mental illness, and 29 carers (n = 12 parent-child dyads). Qualitative analysis was guided by the Social-Ecological Framework to identify barriers and facilitators at the individual (young person/carer level), interpersonal, and service/systemic level. RESULTS: Young people and carers identified eight barriers and six facilitators across the various levels of the Social-Ecological Framework. Barriers included, at the individual level: (1) the complexity of young people's psychosocial needs and (2) lack of awareness/knowledge of services available; at the interpersonal level: (3) negative experiences with adults and (4) fragmented communication between services and family; and at the systemic level: (5) lack of services; (6) long waiting periods; (7) limited service accessibility; and (8) the missing middle. Facilitators included, at the individual level: (1) education for carers; at the interpersonal level: (2) positive therapeutic relationships and (3) carer advocacy/support; and at the systemic level: (4) flexible or responsive services, (5) services that address the psychosocial factors; and (6) safe service environments. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified key barriers and facilitators to accessing and utilising mental health services that may inform service design, development, policy and practice. To enhance their psychosocial functioning, young people and carers want lived-experience workers to provide practical wrap-around support, and mental health services that integrate health and social care, and are flexible, responsive and safe. These findings will inform the co-design of a community-based psychosocial service to support young people experiencing severe mental illness.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: People with serious mental illness (SMI) often fail to receive adequate treatment. To provide a higher level of support, mental health systems have been reformed substantially to integrate mental healthcare into the community. MyCare is one such community-based mental health model of care. This paper describes the study protocol of a controlled trial examining the effect of MyCare on psychosocial and clinical outcomes and hospital admission and duration rates for adults with SMI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multisite non-randomised controlled trial with a 3, 6 and 12-month follow-up period. The study participants will be adults (18-64 years of age) with SMI recruited from Hobart, Launceston and the North-West of Tasmania. The treatment group will include adults who receive both the MyCare intervention and standard mental health support; the control group will include adults who receive only standard mental health support. The primary outcome includes psychosocial and clinical functioning and the secondary outcome will examine hospital admission rates and duration of stay. Mixed-effects models will be used to examine outcome improvements between intake and follow-up. This trial will generate the evidence needed to evaluate the effect of a community mental health support programme delivered in Tasmania, Australia. If MyCare results in sustained positive outcomes for adults with SMI, it could potentially be scaled up more broadly across Australia, addressing the inequity and lack of comprehensive treatment that many individuals with SMI experience. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Tasmanian Health and Medical Human Research Ethics Committee. The findings will be disseminated to participants and staff who delivered the intervention, submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and shared at academic conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000673943.