Psychosis

Author(s):  
Jayashri Kulkarni ◽  
Emorfia Gavrilidis ◽  
Shainal Nathoo ◽  
Jasmin Grigg

Treating patients with psychotic disorders like schizophrenia can be challenging for many primary care practitioners. Many health professionals are intimidated by the prospect of treating severe mental illness, and most do not have the training or experience required to deliver newer psychosis interventions.

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (05) ◽  
pp. 421-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandros Maragakis ◽  
Ragavan Siddharthan ◽  
Jill RachBeisel ◽  
Cassandra Snipes

Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) are more likely to experience preventable medical health issues, such as diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and cardiovascular disease, than the general population. To further compound this issue, these individuals are less likely to seek preventative medical care. These factors result in higher usage of expensive emergency care, lower quality of care, and lower life expectancy. This manuscript presents literature that examines the health disparities this population experiences, and barriers to accessing primary care. Through the identification of these barriers, we recommend that the field of family medicine work in collaboration with the field of mental health to implement ‘reverse’ integrated care (RIC) systems, and provide primary care services in the mental health settings. By embedding primary care practitioners in mental health settings, where individuals with SMI are more likely to present for treatment, this population may receive treatment for somatic care by experts. This not only would improve the quality of care received by patients, but would also remove the burden of managing complex somatic care from providers trained in mental health. The rationale for this RIC system, as well as training and policy reforms, are discussed.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Newbronner ◽  
Panagiotis Spanakis ◽  
Ruth Wadman ◽  
Suzanne Crosland ◽  
Paul Heron ◽  
...  

Aims: To explore: how satisfied people with severe mental illness (SMI) are with the support received during the pandemic; understand any difficulties encountered when accessing both mental health and primary care services; consider ways to mitigate these difficulties; and assess the perceived need for future support from mental health services. Materials and Methods: A representative sample was drawn from a large transdiagnostic clinical cohort of people with SMI, which was recruited between April 2016 and March 2020. The sample was re-surveyed a few months after the beginning of the restrictions. Descriptive frequency statistics were used to analyse the quantitative data. The free text responses were analysed thematically. Results: 367 participants responded to the survey. Two thirds were receiving support from mental health services with the rest supported in primary care or self-managing. A quarter thought they would need more mental health support in the coming year. Half had needed to used community mental health services during the pandemic and the majority had been able to get support. A minority reported that their mental health had deteriorated but they had either not got the supported they wanted or had not sought help. The biggest service change was the reduction in face-to-face appointments and increasing use of phone and video call support. Nearly half of those using mental health services found this change acceptable or even preferred it; acceptability was influenced by several factors. Participants were more likely to be satisfied with support received when seen in person. Discussion: Although most participants were satisfied with the mental health support they had received, a minority were not. This, couple with findings on future need for mental health support has implications for post pandemic demand on services. Remote care has brought benefits but also risks that it could increase inequalities in access to services.


2015 ◽  
Vol 65 (637) ◽  
pp. 429-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Whitley ◽  
Victoria Palmer ◽  
Jane Gunn

Author(s):  
Matthew Large ◽  
Olav Nielssen

A range of killings of one person by another can be described as a homicide. Homicide rates vary greatly between geographic regions, reflecting differences in social factors such as weapon availability, patterns of substance use, the efficacy of the police and other institutions, and overall levels of violent crime. Domestic homicide is killing within a family and includes fatal domestic violence and most homicides of infants, children, and older people. Most homicides by people with mental illness are of family members, but most domestic homicide offenders are not mentally ill. People with mental illness, particularly those with schizophrenia, commit a small percentage of all homicides, but a disproportionate number, compared to the incidence of mental illness. Mental health professionals have a role in preventing homicides by offering interventions for domestic violence, substance use disorder, and the early and continued treatment of psychotic disorders.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document