Perceptions toward issues in cancer care for people with mental illness among psychiatric care providers: A questionnaire study.

OBJECTIVES: To reduce cancer care disparities in people with mental illness, this study aimed to quantify psychiatric care providers' perceptions regarding issues that are insufficiently addressed or difficult to address. METHODS: Psychiatric care providers at 23 psychiatric hospitals in Japan were surveyed using mail questionnaires. Respondents were asked to rate 15 items with four categories related to insufficiencies/difficulties in cancer care for patients with mental illness on a five-point Likert scale. We analyzed the proportion of respondents who answered "insufficient/difficult" for each item. RESULTS: A total of 255 (76.3%) psychiatric care providers responded. For questions related to the skills and attitudes of psychiatric professionals, 48.3%-58.4% of respondents perceived that efforts for supporting cancer screening and treatment were insufficient. For the questions related to collaborations between cancer and psychiatric care providers, 75.3% of respondents perceived that inpatient visits between psychiatric and cancer hospitals were insufficient. For the questions related to in-psychiatric-hospital medical systems, 50.2%-87.2% of respondents perceived that support for screening, diagnosis/treatment, and palliative care for psychiatric inpatients were insufficient/difficult. 41.9%-57.4% of respondents perceived that social services in the community were insufficient. CONCLUSIONS: This study clarified the level of insufficiency/difficulty perceived by psychiatric care providers regarding issues related to cancer care for people with mental illness. Psychiatric care providers are required to have knowledge and skills in cancer screening and treatment. To improve access to cancer prevention, treatment, and palliative care, it may be helpful to establish systems to promote coordination between cancer hospitals and psychiatric hospitals.

Issues of cancer care in people with mental disorders as perceived by cancer care providers: A quantitative questionnaire survey.

OBJECTIVES: To reduce cancer care disparities, this study aimed to clarify the difficulties in cancer care for people with mental disorders as perceived by cancer care providers. METHODS: Cancer care providers at 17 designated cancer hospitals in Japan were surveyed using mail questionnaires. Respondents were asked to rate 29 items related to difficulties or insufficiencies in cancer care for patients with mental disorders on a five-point Likert scale. We analyzed the proportion of respondents who answered "difficult/insufficient" in each item. We also calculated the proportions of responders stratified according to the presence of psychiatric support systems within their hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 388 (58.4%) cancer care providers responded. Among the issues related to "difficulties in diagnosing and treating cancer," support for decision-making, assessment of treatment adherence, and assessment of physical symptoms were perceived as most difficult (73.5%-81.5% of respondents). Among the issues related to 'difficulties or insufficiencies in collaboration among multidisciplinary health care providers,' the issue of advance consultation and sharing information with the patient's primary psychiatric care provider was perceived as most difficult (52.2%). Among the issues related to "insufficiencies of in-hospital and community medical systems," education to provide reasonable accommodation was perceived as most insufficient (47.4%). The perceived difficulties of over half of the issues varied significantly between hospitals depending on the level of psychiatric support systems. CONCLUSIONS: This study clarified the difficulties of cancer care in patients with mental disorders as perceived by cancer care providers. Some issues may be resolved by psychiatric liaison teams.

Cancer care for people with mental disorders: A qualitative survey among cancer care and psychiatric care professionals in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: It is widely assumed that there are multiple levels (from individual to policy level) of problems involving disparities in cancer care for people with mental disorders. However, few studies have comprehensively investigated issues as perceived by medical professionals. The purpose of the present study was to identify a wide range of issues in cancer care for people with mental disorders and offer corresponding solutions for both cancer care professionals and psychiatric care professionals. METHODS: We distributed open-ended questionnaires to 754 healthcare professionals in various medical facilities, including designated cancer hospitals, psychiatric hospitals, and other local healthcare/welfare facilities. Participants were asked to describe issues in cancer care for people with mental disorders. RESULTS: Of the 754 recruited professionals, 439 (58.2%) responded to the questionnaire. Sixty-one issues were extracted and categorized into 10 categories: patient factors; isolation and lack of support; obstacles to transport; socioeconomic factors; attitudes of psychiatric professionals; medical system of psychiatric hospitals; attitudes of cancer care professionals; medical system of designated cancer hospitals; regional cancer medical systems; and lack of coordination among multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. Forty-eight specific solutions were summarized into 12 goals. CONCLUSIONS: The present study widely identified issues causing disparities in cancer care for patients with mental disorders. We found that the issues extended from the patient level to the public-policy level. Our findings suggest the need for a multidisciplinary approach that includes both cancer and psychiatric care professionals to address the gap in cancer care for people with mental disorders.

Validity and Reliability of the Japanese Version of the 12-item Self-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in Patients with Schizophrenia.

It is necessary to assess functional impairment when treating schizophrenia. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) has been adopted as a measure of functional disability in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. This study was a secondary analysis from a cross-sectional study of health-related behaviors among patients with schizophrenia. We examined the validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 when self-administered by such patients. Participants were 350 outpatients with schizophrenia from a psychiatric hospital. The standard six-factor structure of the WHODAS 2.0 showed a good fit for these participants. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.858, showing good internal consistency. The WHODAS 2.0 showed moderate correlations with the modified Global Assessment of Functioning and Kessler 6 scales (r=-0.434 and 0.555, respectively). The results of this study show that the Japanese version of the 12-item self-administered WHODAS 2.0 has good internal consistency and convergent validity among patients with schizophrenia. Further exploration of the usefulness of WHODAS 2.0 in clinical settings is needed.

Trends in smoking rates among individuals with serious psychological distress: Analysis of data from a Japanese national survey, 2007-2016.

To determine whether the downward trend in the smoking rate over time in Japan differs between individuals with and without serious psychological distress (SPD), we used nationally representative data sets from the 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2016 Comprehensive Survey of Living Conditions of Japan. SPD was defined as a score ≥ 13 on the six-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. We conducted multivariate logistic regression analyses including the interaction terms between SPD and survey year. A total 187,685 participants were included. The interaction terms between SPD and survey year among men were significant for 2010 and 2016 but not for 2013. Among women, the interaction terms between SPD and survey year were not significant for any year. In conclusion, we confirmed that the gap in the rate of smoking between men with SPD and those without SPD decreased from 2007 to 2016. Among women, the gap in the smoking rate between those with SPD and those without SPD remained unchanged. Our findings suggest a need for specific support strategies including pharmacological interventions, especially for women smokers with SPD. Further studies are warranted to identify factors contributing to these sex differences.