scholarly journals Public sector antiretroviral treatment programme in South Africa: health care workers' attention to mental health problems

AIDS Care ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 458-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Pappin ◽  
Edwin Wouters ◽  
Frederik L.R. Booysen ◽  
Crick Lund
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 153
Author(s):  
ParthSingh Meena ◽  
CharanSingh Jilowa ◽  
Anubhuti Sharma ◽  
Mahendra Jain ◽  
Neelam Nainwani ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
R. Van Damme ◽  
A.-S. Van Parys ◽  
C. Vogels ◽  
K. Roelens ◽  
G. Lemmens

A protocol for the screening, detection and treatment of perinatal anxiety and depressive disorders Importance. With a prevalence of 20%, mental health problems are considered as one of the most frequent complications during pregnancy and the postnatal period. Despite their high prevalence, these mental health problems often remain underdiagnosed and undertreated. Objective. The protocol aims to offer perinatal health care workers (health care and mental health care workers) a framework helping them to detect and discuss depressive and anxiety complaints of women during the perinatal period (up to 1 year after childbirth) and to refer them for treatment. Evidence acquisition. The protocol, which was based on international guidelines and recent scientific evidence, was developed by an interdisciplinary task force taking into account concerns about its daily practicability and current perinatal health care. Results. The protocol guides staff through a psychosocial assessment, a stepped screening, a clinical assessment and treatment steps. It is currently being implemented throughout Flanders (Belgium) with support of the Flemish Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Family. Conclusion. Integrating mental health screening and treatment in standard perinatal care will improve the mental health care for women, their partners and their offspring.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Vos

Objective: This meta-analysis examines the psychological impact of COVID-19, SARS and MERS pandemics on health-care workers, patients and the general population, in line with PRISMA, MOOSE, MARS and CASP guidelines. Methods: Searches were conducted on 28-29 March 2020 in Pubmed, Medline, PsycInfo, APA articles, Web-of-Knowledge and scholar.google.com. Hedges’ g was calculated with random-effects models. Results: The final selection included 75 publications from 15,984 papers. Twenty-six studies described the impact of COVID-19 in 104,361 participants, showing that 59% (95%CI: 37%-85%) of health-care workers experienced acute/post-traumatic stress, and 37% (95%CI: 30%-54%) experienced depression, general distress, insomnia and/or anxiety. Of all COVID-19 patients, 32% (95% CI: 22%-42%) experienced acute/post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, insomnia and/or distress. In the general population, 25% (95%CI: 15%-35%) experienced any of these psychological symptoms. COVID-19 had a larger impact than SARS/MERS in 28,499 participants in 44 studies. During SARS/MERS pandemics, 33% (95%CI: 25%-41%) of health-care workers, 31% (95%CI: 18%-45%) of SARS/MERS-patients and 15% (95%CI: 7%-23%) of the general population experienced any of these psychological symptoms. The psychological impact was predicted (R<.20-.40>) by the individual’s physical health, restrictions to leisure and social activities, and quarantine. Frontline health-care workers experienced a larger psychological impact than the general population, particularly if they worked with infected patients and reported unfavourable work circumstances. Conclusions: This study can be used to predict the prevalence of mental health problems during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and to predict which individuals are most at risk of developing mental health problems. Health care workers and vulnerable individuals should be psychologically screened and offered mental health-care. Quarantine should be as short as possible, to prevent mental health problems. Public health significance statementThis meta-analysis indicates that between one-third of the general population and half of all health care workers experience a moderate to severe mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This impact is larger than during SARS and MERS pandemics. The psychological impact on health care workers is mainly predicted by their work circumstances, and the impact on the general population by their pre-existing physical and mental well-being and the psychological effects of quarantine.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 31
Author(s):  
AnilBindu Sukumaran ◽  
L Manju ◽  
Regi Jose ◽  
Meghana Narendran ◽  
C Padmini ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Simeon J Zuercher ◽  
Philipp Kerksieck ◽  
Christine Adamus ◽  
Christian Burr ◽  
Anja I Lehmann ◽  
...  

Background: The swift spread of SARS-CoV-2 provides a challenge worldwide. As a consequence of restrictive public health measures like isolation, quarantine, and community containment, the provision of mental health services is a major challenge. Evidence from past virus epidemics and the current SARS-CoV-2 outbreak indicate high prevalence rates of mental health problems (MHP) as short- and long-term consequences. However, a broader picture of MHP among different populations is still lacking. Methods: We conducted a rapid review on MHP prevalence rates published since 2000, during and after epidemics, including the general public, health care workers, and survivors. Any quantitative articles reporting on MHP rates were included. Out of 2855 articles screened, a total of 74 were included in this review. Results: Most original studies on MHP were conducted in China in the context of SARS-CoV-1, and reported on anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms/disorder, general psychiatric morbidity, and psychological symptoms. The MHP rates across studies, populations, and epidemics vary substantially. While some studies show high and persistent rates of MHP in populations directly affected by isolation, quarantine, threat of infection, infection, or life-threatening symptoms (e.g. health care workers), other studies report minor effects. Furthermore, even less affected populations (e.g. distant to epidemic epicenter, no contact history with suspected or confirmed cases) can show high rates of MHP. Discussion: MHP vary largely across countries and risk-groups in reviewed studies. The results call attention to potentially high MHP during epidemics. Individuals affected directly by an epidemic might be at a higher risk of short or even long-term mental health impairments. This study delivers insights stemming from a wide range of psychiatric instruments and questionnaires. The results call for the use of validated and standardized instruments, reference norms, and pre-post measurements to better understand the magnitude of the MHP during and after the epidemics. Nevertheless, emerging MHP should be considered during epidemics including the provision of access to mental health care to mitigate potential mental impairments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document