scholarly journals Stigmatisation of those with mental health conditions in the acute general hospital setting. A qualitative framework synthesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 255 ◽  
pp. 112974 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Perry ◽  
Vanessa Lawrence ◽  
Claire Henderson
BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S137-S138
Author(s):  
George Gillett ◽  
Owen Davis ◽  
Amarit Gill ◽  
Clare van Hamel

AimsPrevious research suggests the prevalence of mental health conditions among medical inpatients may be as high as 38%. Anecdotally, junior doctors report lacking the confidence, knowledge and skills to assess and treat patients with psychiatric conditions. Identifying this unmet need offers potential to improve standards of care and achieve parity of esteem between psychiatric and medical conditions within the general hospital. Aims:To assess self-reported preparedness of newly-qualified Foundation Doctors to care for patients with acute or chronic psychiatric symptoms in comparison to physical health conditions.MethodIn September of each year (2017, 2018, 2019), a survey was cascaded to all incoming Foundation Year 1 Doctors. For each respective year there were 1673, 961 & 1301 respondents. Respondents were asked to rate their agreement with statements on a Likert scale. Statements pertaining to mental health included “a) I am competent in acute mental health care provision, b) I am competent in chronic mental health care provision” and “I feel confident in prescribing the following drugs; c) drugs for mental health problems”. Comparison statements assessed confidence caring for medically unwell patients, performing practical procedures and prescribing drugs for physical health conditions.ResultPreparedness for acute and chronic mental health were lower than both physical health comparison items; preparedness to care for patients with critical illness (acute: r = 0.794, p < 0.001, chronic: r = 0.556, p < 0.001) and preparedness to perform practical procedures (acute: r = 0.724, p < 0.001, chronic: r = 0.433, p < 0.001).Confidence prescribing mental health drugs was lower than all other comparison items (simple analgesia: r = 0.854, bronchodilators: r = 0.789, antimicrobials: r = 0.772, inhaled steroids: r = 0.720, intravenous fluids: r = 0.702, oral anti-diabetics: r = 0.611, anticoagulants: r = 0.515, narcotics: r = 0.514, insulin: r = 0.206; p < 0.001)ConclusionThese results identify a disparity in foundation doctors’ self-reported preparedness to treat acute and chronic mental health conditions and prescribe psychotropic medications, compared to a variety of physical health domains. To our knowledge this is the first large-scale study to empirically test a potential discrepancy between newly-qualified doctors’ preparedness to treat patients’ mental and physical health needs. Medical school education and foundation training may therefore present a fruitful opportunity to improve care for patients with psychiatric conditions within general hospital settings.


Diabetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 70-LB
Author(s):  
ALEJANDRA M. WIEDEMAN ◽  
YING FAI NGAI ◽  
AMANDA M. HENDERSON ◽  
CONSTADINA PANAGIOTOPOULOS ◽  
ANGELA M. DEVLIN

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huiting Xie

BACKGROUND Many people are affected by mental health conditions, yet its prevalence in certain populations are not well documented. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to describe the attributes of people with mental health conditions in U.S and SG in terms of: perception of mental health recovery and its correlates such as strengths self-efficacy, resourcefulness and stigma experience. With the findings, not only could the knowledge base for mental health recovery in both countries be enhanced but interventions and policies relating to self-efficacy, resourcefulness and de-stigmatization for mental health recovery could be informed. METHODS A A cross-sectional, descriptive study with convenience sample of 200 community dwelling adults were selected, 100 pax from the United States (U.S) and 100 pax from Singapore (SG). Adults with serious mental illnesses without substance abuse impacting on their recovery were recruited. Participants completed self-administered questionaires measuring their mental health recovery, strengths self-efficacy, resourcefulness and stigma experience. RESULTS This study offered the unique opportunity to examine mental health recovery as well as its correlates such as strengths self-efficacy, resourcefulness and stigma experience from both the United States and Singapore. While the perception of mental health recovery and positive attributes like strengths self-efficacy and resourcefulness remained strong in participants with serious mental illnesses across both countries, people with serious mental illnesses in both countries still experienced negative perception like stigma. The findings would not only inform strategies to promote mental health recovery but also enhance the focus on correlates such as strengths self-efficacy and resourcefulness across both countries. CONCLUSIONS The findings would not only inform strategies to promote mental health recovery but also enhance the focus on correlates such as strengths self-efficacy and resourcefulness across both countries.


2021 ◽  
pp. 145507252098596
Author(s):  
Sinikka L. Kvamme ◽  
Michael M. Pedersen ◽  
Sagi Alagem-Iversen ◽  
Birgitte Thylstrup

Background: In Denmark the boundaries between cannabis as an illicit drug and licit medicine have shifted rapidly in recent years, affecting also policy. However, the vast majority of Danes, who use cannabis as medicine (CaM) continue to rely on the unregulated market for supply. This study explores patterns of use and motives for use of CaM in Denmark. Methods: An anonymous online survey was made available to a convenience sample of users of CaM from July 14, 2018 to November 1, 2018. Participants were recruited through patient organisations, social and public media, and the illegal open cannabis market. Results: Of the final sample ( n = 3,021), a majority were women (62.6%) and the mean age was 49 years. Most had no prescription for CaM (90.9%), a majority had no or limited previous experience with recreational cannabis use (63.9%), and had used CaM for two years or less (65.0%). The most common form of intake was oil (56.8%) followed by smoke (24.0%). CBD oil (65.0%) was used more than hash, pot or skunk (36.2%). Most frequent conditions treated were chronic pain (32.0%), sleep disturbances (27.5%), stress (23.7%), osteoarthritis (22.7%), anxiety (19.6%), and depression (19.6%). Overall, users experienced CaM to be effective in managing somatic and mental health conditions and reported relatively few side-effects. CBD oil only users were more likely to be women, older, have limited recreational experience and have initiated use recently. Conclusions: A new user group has emerged in Denmark that, for the most part, use illegally sourced CaM to treat a broad range of somatic and mental health conditions, often with experienced effect and relatively low level of side-effects. The prevalent use of low-potency CBD oil indicates an interest in effects beyond the high normally associated with cannabis use. More clinical research into the effects and side-effects of CaM is needed to draw the boundaries of the medical utility of cannabis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document