scholarly journals Impact of Opera on Mental Health Stigma: Pilot of Provider/Community Workshop

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kia Skrine Jeffers ◽  
Joseph D. Mango ◽  
Lingqi Tang ◽  
Elyn R. Saks ◽  
Kenneth B. Wells ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Complicated Grief ◽  
Mental Health Stigma ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Workshop Discussion ◽  
Willingness To Engage

Abstract Background Arts can influence mental health stigma, but little is known about impact of operas. We examined effects of a two-opera workshop on complicated grief and schizophrenia. Methods Pre-post audience surveys with post-workshop discussion. The primary outcome was a 4-item measure of willingness to engage with persons with grief or schizophrenia. Secondary outcomes were perceptions of art affecting stigma and stigma mediators. Of 47 participants, 33 had pre-post surveys for both operas. Results There was a significant pre-post opera increase in audience willingness to engage with persons with grief or schizophrenia (p < .001). Perceptions of impact on mediators such as empathy, were significantly greater for the opera on schizophrenia relative to grief (p < .001).. Conclusion The pre- to post increase in audience willingness to engage with affected persons (primary) with greater impact on secondary mediators for the schizophrenia opera and post-discussion suggest that operas may be a forum for addressing mental health stigma and promoting empathy.

scholarly journals Preventing sickness absence among employees with common mental disorders or stress-related symptoms at work: a cluster randomised controlled trial of a problem-solving-based intervention conducted by the Occupational Health Services

2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (7) ◽  
pp. 454-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marijke Keus van de Poll ◽  
Lotta Nybergh ◽  
Caroline Lornudd ◽  
Jan Hagberg ◽  
Lennart Bodin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Occupational Health ◽  
Sickness Absence ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

ObjectivesCommon mental disorders (CMDs) are among the main causes of sickness absence and can lead to suffering and high costs for individuals, employers and the society. The occupational health service (OHS) can offer work-directed interventions to support employers and employees. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on sickness absence and health of a work-directed intervention given by the OHS to employees with CMDs or stress-related symptoms.MethodsRandomisation was conducted at the OHS consultant level and each consultant was allocated into either giving a brief problem-solving intervention (PSI) or care as usual (CAU). The study group consisted of 100 employees with stress symptoms or CMDs. PSI was highly structured and used a participatory approach, involving both the employee and the employee’s manager. CAU was also work-directed but not based on the same theoretical concepts as PSI. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, at 6 and at 12 months. Primary outcome was registered sickness absence during the 1-year follow-up period. Among the secondary outcomes were self-registered sickness absence, return to work (RTW) and mental health.ResultsA statistical interaction for group × time was found on the primary outcome (p=0.033) and PSI had almost 15 days less sickness absence during follow-up compared with CAU. Concerning the secondary outcomes, PSI showed an earlier partial RTW and the mental health improved in both groups without significant group differences.ConclusionPSI was effective in reducing sickness absence which was the primary outcome in this study.

scholarly journals Droperidolv. haloperidol for sedation of aggressive behaviour in acute mental health: Randomised controlled trial

2015 ◽  
Vol 206 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie Calver ◽  
Vincent Drinkwater ◽  
Rahul Gupta ◽  
Colin B. Page ◽  
Geoffrey K. Isbister
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Behavioural Disturbance ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Psychiatric Units ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Effective Sedation

BackgroundAgitation and aggression are significant problems in acute psychiatric units. There is little consensus on which drug is most effective and safest for sedation of these patients.AimsTo compare the effectiveness and safety of haloperidolv. droperidol for patients with agitation and aggression.MethodIn a masked, randomised controlled trial (ACTRN12611000565943) intramuscular droperidol (10 mg) was compared with intramuscular haloperidol (10 mg) for adult patients with acute behavioural disturbance in a psychiatric intensive care unit. The primary outcome was time to sedation within 120 min. Secondary outcomes were use of additional sedation, adverse events and staff injuries.ResultsFrom 584 patients, 110 were randomised to haloperidol and 118 to droperidol. Effective sedation occurred in 210 (92%) patients within 120 min. There was no significant difference in median time to sedation: 20 min (interquartile range 15–30, range 10–75) for haloperidolv. 25 min (IQR 15–30, range 10–115) for droperidol (P= 0.89). Additional sedation was used more often with haloperidol (13%v. 5%,P= 0.06), but adverse effects were less common with haloperidol (1%v. 5%,P= 0.12). There were 8 staff injuries.ConclusionsBoth haloperidol and droperidol were effective for sedation of patients with acute behavioural disturbance.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the E-Mental Health Mindfulness-Based and Skills-Based “CoPE It” Intervention to Reduce Psychological Distress in Times of COVID-19: Results of a Bicentre Longitudinal Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Bäuerle ◽  
Lisa Jahre ◽  
Martin Teufel ◽  
Christoph Jansen ◽  
Venja Musche ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychological Distress ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Anxiety Symptoms ◽  
Generalized Anxiety ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic poses immense challenges for health care systems and population-wide mental health. The e-mental health intervention “CoPE It” has been developed to offer standardized and manualized support to overcome psychological distress caused by the pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of “CoPE It” in terms of reducing distress (primary outcome), depression and anxiety symptoms, and improving self-efficacy, and mindfulness (secondary outcomes). Furthermore, the intervention's usability, feasibility, and participants' satisfaction with “CoPE It” was evaluated (tertiary outcome). The study protocol has been published previously.Methods: A bicentre longitudinal study was conducted from April 27th 2020 to May 3rd 2021. N = 110 participants were included in the analyses. The intervention consisted of four modules featuring different media promoting evidence-based methods of cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness-based stress reduction. Difference in psychological distress between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1) were analyzed by repeated measure analysis of covariance. Mixed linear models were applied to assess moderating effects. Depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety symptoms, self-efficacy, and mindfulness were compared between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1) via t-tests. Usability of the “CoPE It” intervention and participants' satisfaction was evaluated by calculation means and frequencies.Results:Primary outcome: A significant effect of time on psychological distress at post-intervention (T1) after controlling for age, gender, education, mental illness and attitudes toward online interventions was found. Depressive and anxiety symptoms, and mindfulness were a significant moderators of the relationship between time and psychological distress for consistent wording. Secondary outcomes: There was a significant decrease in depressive symptoms and generalized anxiety, and a significant increase in self-efficacy and mindfulness between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1). Tertiary outcomes: 95.83% of the participants thought the “CoPE It” intervention was easy to use and 87.50% were satisfied with the “CoPE It” intervention in an overall, general sense.Conclusion: The e-mental health “CoPE It” intervention seems to be an effective approach in reducing psychological distress, anxiety and depressive symptoms, and in enhancing self-efficacy and mindfulness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants' satisfaction and the program‘s feasibility, and usability were proven to be high.Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: DRKS00021301.

scholarly journals Crisis-planning interventions for people with psychotic illness or bipolar disorder: systematic review and meta-analyses

BJPsych Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Molyneaux ◽  
Amelia Turner ◽  
Bridget Candy ◽  
Sabine Landau ◽  
Sonia Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Bipolar Disorder ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Crisis Planning ◽  
Psychotic Illness ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Psychiatric Admissions ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

Background Mental health services lack a strong evidence base on the most effective interventions to reduce compulsory admissions. However, some research suggests a positive impact of crisis-planning interventions in which patients are involved in planning for their future care during a mental health crisis. Aims This review aimed to synthesise randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence on the effectiveness of crisis-planning interventions (for example advance statements and joint crisis plans) in reducing rates of compulsory hospital admissions for people with psychotic illness or bipolar disorder, compared with usual care (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084808). Method Six online databases were searched in October 2018. The primary outcome was compulsory psychiatric admissions and secondary outcomes included other psychiatric admissions, therapeutic alliance, perceived coercion and cost-effectiveness. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane collaboration tool. Results The search identified 1428 studies and 5 RCTs were eligible. One study had high risk of bias because of incomplete primary outcome data. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a 25% reduction in compulsory admissions for those receiving crisis-planning interventions compared with usual care (risk ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.61–0.93, P = 0.008; from five studies). There was no statistical evidence that the intervention reduced the risk of voluntary or combined voluntary and compulsory psychiatric admissions. Few studies assessed other secondary outcomes. Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests that crisis-planning interventions substantially reduce the risk of compulsory admissions among individuals with psychotic illness or bipolar disorder. Despite common components, interventions varied in their content and intensity across the trials. The optimal models and implementation of these interventions require further investigation. Declaration of interest E.M., S.L., S.J. and B.L.-E. received funding from the National Institute for Health Research during the conduct of the study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document