Decision aid on disclosure of mental health status to an employer: feasibility and outcomes of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many mental health service users delay or avoid disclosing their condition to employers because of experience, or anticipation, of discrimination. However, non-disclosure precludes the ability to request 'reasonable adjustments'. There have been no intervention studies to support decision-making about disclosure to an employer. AIMS: To determine whether the decision aid has an effect that is sustained beyond its immediate impact; to determine whether a large-scale trial is feasible; and to optimise the designs of a larger trial and of the decision aid. METHOD: In this exploratory randomised controlled trial (RCT) in London, participants were randomly assigned to use of a decision aid plus usual care or usual care alone. Follow-up was at 3 months. Primary outcomes were: (a) stage of decision-making; (b) decisional conflict; and (c) employment-related outcomes (trial registration number: NCT01379014). RESULTS: We recruited 80 participants and interventions were completed for 36 out of 40 in the intervention group; in total 71 participants were followed up. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that reduction in decisional conflict was significantly greater in the intervention group than among controls (mean improvement -22.7 (s.d. = 15.2) v. -11.2 (s.d. = 18.1), P = 0.005). More of the intervention group than controls were in full-time employment at follow-up (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The observed reduction in decisional conflict regarding disclosure has a number of potential benefits which next need to be tested in a definitive trial.

A decision aid to assist decisions on disclosure of mental health status to an employer: protocol for the CORAL exploratory randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The UK Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for employers to ask health questions before making an offer of employment except in certain circumstances. While the majority of employers would prefer applicants to disclose a mental illness at the application stage, many people either wait until they have accepted the job and then disclose to an occupational health professional, or do not do so at all due to the anticipation of discrimination or a wish for privacy. However, non disclosure precludes the ability to request reasonable adjustments in the workplace or to make a claim of direct discrimination. Disclosure to employers is therefore a difficult decision. A recent pilot study by our group of the CORAL decision aid showed that it helped mental health service users clarify their needs and values regarding disclosure and led to reduction in decisional conflict. The present proof of concept trial aims to determine whether a full scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) is justifiable and feasible, and to optimise its design. METHODS: In this single blind exploratory RCT in London, a total of 80 participants (inclusion criteria: age ≥ 18 years, on the caseload of a specialist employment adviser working with people with mental illness; referred to the adviser either from primary care via Improving Access to Psychological Therapies or secondary mental health service; currently seeking or interested in either paid or voluntary employment, and a Decisional Conflict Scale score of 37.5 or greater and stage of decision score 1-5) will be recruited from vocational advice services. After completing a baseline assessment, participants will be randomly assigned to one of two conditions (1) Use of the CORAL Decision Aid (DA) in addition to treatment as usual or (2) Treatment as usual. Those allocated to the DA condition will be given it to read and complete, and the researcher will be present to record the time taken and any content that causes confusion. Intervention participants may keep the decision aid but are discouraged from showing it to other service users to avoid contamination. Follow up interviews will be conducted at 3 months. Primary outcomes are: (i) stage of decision making score; (ii) decisional conflict scores and (iii) employment related outcomes. Secondary analyses will identify predictors of disclosure and qualitative analysis will explore the impact of the intervention. DISCUSSION: A reduction in decisional conflict regarding disclosure leading to more effective job seeking activity could have significant economic consequences for people with mental illness in terms of employment rates and productivity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01379014 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier).

Stigma- and non-stigma-related treatment barriers to mental healthcare reported by service users and caregivers.

Delayed treatment seeking for people experiencing symptoms of mental illness is common despite available mental healthcare. Poor outcomes are associated with untreated mental illness and caregivers may eventually need to seek help on the service user's behalf. More attention has recently focused on the role of stigma in delayed treatment seeking. This study aimed to establish the frequency of stigma- and non-stigma-related treatment barriers reported by 202 service users and 80 caregivers; to compare treatment barriers reported by service users and caregivers; and to investigate demographic predictors of reporting stigma-related treatment barriers. The profile of treatment barriers differed between service users and caregivers. Service users were more likely to report stigma-related treatment barriers than caregivers across all stigma-related items. Service users who were female, had a diagnosis of schizophrenia or with GCSEs (UK qualifications usually obtained at age 16) were significantly more likely to report stigma-related treatment barriers. Caregivers who were female or of Black ethnicities were significantly more likely to report stigma-related treatment barriers. Multifaceted approaches are needed to reduce barriers to treatment seeking for both service users and caregivers, with anti-stigma interventions being of particular importance for the former group.

Mental health-related discrimination as a predictor of low engagement with mental health services.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the hypothesis that mental health-related discrimination experienced by adults receiving care from community mental health teams is associated with low engagement with services and to explore the pathways between these two variables. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 202 adults registered with inner-city community mental health teams in the United Kingdom completed interviews assessing their engagement with mental health services (service user-rated version of the Service Engagement Scale), discrimination that they experienced because of mental illness, and other variables. Structural equation modeling was conducted to examine the relationship of experienced discrimination and service engagement with potential mediating and moderating variables, such as anticipated discrimination (Questionnaire on Anticipated Discrimination), internalized stigma (Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Scale), stigma stress appraisal (Stigma Stress Appraisal), mistrust in services, the therapeutic relationship (Scale to Assess Therapeutic Relationships), difficulty disclosing information about one's mental health, and social support. Analyses controlled for age, race-ethnicity, and symptomatology. RESULTS: No evidence was found for a direct effect between experienced discrimination and service engagement. The total indirect effect of experienced discrimination on service engagement was statistically significant (coefficient=1.055, 95% confidence interval [CI]=.312-2.074, p=.019), mainly via mistrust in mental health services and therapeutic relationships (coefficient=.804, CI=.295-1.558, p=.019). A 1-unit increase in experienced discrimination via this pathway resulted in .804-unit of deterioration in service engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate the importance of building and maintaining service users' trust in mental health services and in therapeutic relationships with professionals and countering the discrimination that may erode trust.

Interventions to increase initial appointment attendance in mental health services: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE Although nonattendance at initial appointments in mental health services is a substantial problem, the phenomenon is poorly understood. This review synthesized findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase initial appointment attendance and determined whether theories or models contributed to intervention design. METHODS Six electronic databases were systematically searched, and reference lists of identified studies were also examined. Studies included were RCTs (including "quasi-randomized" controlled trials) that compared standard practice with an intervention to increase attendance at initial appointments in a sample of adults who had a scheduled initial appointment in a mental health or substance abuse service setting. RESULTS Of 144 potentially relevant studies, 21 met inclusion criteria. These studies were reported in 20 different research papers. Of these, 16 studies (N=3,673 participants) were included in the analyses (five were excluded because they reported only nonattendance at the initial appointment). Separate analyses were conducted for each intervention type (opt-in systems, telephone reminders and prompts, orientation and reminder letters, accelerated intake, preappointment completion of psychodynamic questionnaires, and "other"). Narrative synthesis was used for analysis because the high level of heterogeneity between studies precluded a meta-analysis. The results were mixed for all types of intervention. Some isolated high-quality studies of opt-in systems, orientation and reminder letters, and more novel interventions demonstrated a beneficial effect. CONCLUSIONS The synthesized findings indicated that orientation and reminder letters may have a small beneficial effect. Consistent evidence for the efficacy of other types of common interventions is lacking. More novel interventions, such as asking clients to formulate plans to deal with obstacles to attendance and giving clients a choice of therapist style, showed some promise, but studies require replication.

The experience of recovery from the perspective of people with common mental health problems: findings from a telephone survey.

BACKGROUND: For people with common mental health problems such as depression and anxiety related disorders the understanding of what recovery means and what it may entail is less fully developed than for people with less common mental health problems such as schizophrenia. AIM: The aim of this telephone survey was to obtain a clearer conception and better understanding of the value of recovery from the perspective of service users who have experienced common mental health problems. METHODS: Data was collected from telephone interviews with 98 service users using a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methods. RESULTS: The service users' quantitative ratings of their subjective improvement indicated that recovery was a state of being that was manifestly different from the experience of being unwell. The data from the qualitative interviews corroborated these findings. A central theme that also emerged from the analysis of the data was that recovery was associated with having a greater sense of balance and control. Service users indicated that this sense of balance and control operated on many levels, however it was most significant in the context of dealing with their most salient concerns and pursuing their personal goals. CONCLUSION: More emphasis may need to be placed on enabling service users to identify their salient concerns and pursue their personal goals in order to give them the sense of balance and control they are looking for.