Low access and inadequate treatment in mental health care for asylum seekers and refugees in Germany-A prospective follow-up study over 12 months and a nationwide cross-sectional study.

Refugees experience elevated rates of mental health problems, but little is known about mental health service utilization and quality among asylum seekers and refugees in Europe. In a 12-month follow-up study of newly arrived refugees (N = 166, Mage  = 32.38 years, 30.7% female) and a nationwide cross-sectional study (N = 579, Mage  = 33.89 years, 36.2% female) of refugees who had been living in Germany for an average of 6 years, we examined objective need for mental health treatment, perceived need, access to treatment services, and adequacy of treatment. We defined minimally adequate mental health treatment according to the WHO World Mental Health Survey as ≥8 sessions of psychotherapy (minimally adequate psychotherapy) or pharmacotherapy plus ≥4 medical visits (minimally adequate pharmacotherapy). In both studies, two in three individuals screened for mental health symptoms and additionally perceived a need for professional treatment. Of those, less than half had contact to any service provider, with only 1 in 14 receiving minimally adequate psychotherapy. Overall, no more than one in seven of refugees in need received minimally adequate treatment. Despite a comprehensive mental health-care system, refugees' access to mental health care and the treatment provided are inadequate. Health policies are urgently needed to provide equitable mental health care for all.

Welcome, how are you doing? - towards a systematic mental health screening and crisis management for newly arriving refugees.

Background: Compared to the general German population, refugees in Germany are a high-risk group for trauma spectrum disorders. Currently, many barriers exist for the implementation of a screen-and-treat approach for mental disorders as part of the routine health care provision during the early stage of the immigration process.Objective: The aim of the present study was to develop and test a systematic screening approach to identify individual refugees in need of mental health care during the initial immigration phase.Method: 167 newly arrived refugees underwent a screening interview with the Refugee Health Screener (RHS) carried out by Intercultural Therapy Assistants (ITAs). The ITAs were super-vised by psychologists at a reception centre in Bielefeld, Germany. A subsample of 48 persons partici-pated in clinical validation interviews.Results: Findings demonstrated the need for and feasibility of a systematic screening during the initial immigration phase. However, established cut-off values of the RHS had to be adapted and the screening procedure had to be adjusted due to the needs of a significant number of refugees in severe psychological crises.Conclusion: A systematic screening that is applied shortly after arrival facilitates the early identification of refugees at risk of developing mental disorders and may be helpful to prevent chronic symptom development and an aggravation of psychological crises.

A systematic complementary screening procedure during the initial immigration phase was found to be useful for the identification of refugees in need of mental health care.The procedure could be implemented both safely and efficiently in conjunction with the initial medical check-up for recently arrived refugees.Responding to the needs of the refugees immediately following their arrival in Germany, we adjusted the cut-off of the screening instrument and suggest to explicitly include a detection procedure for severe psychological crises.

Childhood Maltreatment in Individuals With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: The Impact of Cut-Off Scores on Prevalence Rates.

Childhood maltreatment is a common phenomenon in various psychiatric disorders. Accordingly, patients with disorders from the schizophrenia spectrum (SSD) appear to have high prevalence rates of childhood maltreatment. However, the interpretation and comparability of prevalence rates is impeded by methodological weaknesses and differences such as measures and thresholds used in previous studies. Therefore, we aimed to provide and compare systematically captured data on prevalence rates of all common types of childhood maltreatment in patients with SSD using a standardized and well-established questionnaire and the most frequently used thresholds. The sample consisted of 48 patients with a primary diagnosis of SSD. 58.3-77.1% of the sample experienced at least one type of childhood maltreatment. Prevalence rates for physical abuse, physical neglect, and emotional abuse were dependent on the thresholds used, while equal rates were found for emotional neglect and sexual abuse. Physical neglect (46-67%), and emotional abuse (44-48%) were most commonly reported, followed by emotional neglect (38%), physical abuse (25-38%), and sexual abuse (25%). Additionally, high levels of peer victimization were reported by SSD patients. It appears that childhood maltreatment is a common phenomenon in SSD, even though methodological details, especially cut-off scores, have a substantial impact on the prevalence rates that are determined. Therefore, the methodology of studies should be closely examined when drawing conclusions from presented prevalence rates.

Attentional avoidance in peer victimized individuals with and without psychiatric disorders.

BACKGROUND: Attentional biases are a relatively robust phenomenon among clinical populations but less pronounced in healthy participants. However, regarding the components of attentional biases and the directions of attention allocation, there are several inconsistencies in the literature. The present study examined whether these inconsistencies can be traced back to previous experiences of relational peer victimization in clinical populations. METHODS: Participants were subjects with a diagnosed psychiatric disorder (n = 30) and healthy controls (n = 31). Additionally, the sample was divided into two subgroups according to the participants' reports of previous relational peer victimization (high peer victimization: n = 28; low peer victimization: n = 33). Attentional biases were measured by the Emotional Stroop task and a dot-probe task. RESULTS: In both samples, peer victimized participants showed delayed response times when color-naming negative and positive compared to neutral adjectives in the Emotional Stroop task. Likewise, the dot-probe task indicated attentional avoidance of both negative and positive words in peer victimized participants with and without a psychiatric disorder. Interestingly, presence of a psychiatric disorder did not have a significant effect on attentional biases. CONCLUSION: Both tasks could detect that attentional processes were linked to the experience of peer victimization rather than to the current diagnostic status of the participants. Attentional avoidance of emotional stimuli may prevent victimized individuals from responding adequately to environmental stimuli, which may increase the risk for the development of psychopathology.