scholarly journals Common Mental Disorders

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-217
Author(s):  
A Risal

Common mental disorders are a group of distress states manifesting with anxiety, depressive and unexplained somatic symptoms typically encountered in community and primary care settings. Risk factors for these disorders are mainly lower socio-economic status, psychological illnesses, poor reproductive health, gender disadvantage and physical ill-health. WHO has recommended that treatment of all these disorders should be based in primary care to be more effective and accessible to all the community people. The structure of mental health care in primary care is generally understood in terms of the “pathways to care” model and it plays a major role in countries like ours where community-based mental health services do not exist. Both the psychological and pharmacological therapies are found to be equally effective for treating these disorders. Integration of mental health into primary care can be considered as the stepping stone in the way forward to tackle the barriers and problems in effective management of common mental disorders in the community. The acute shortage of mental health professionals and the relatively low levels of awareness about mental disorders make it mandatory that primary health care should remain the single largest sector for mental health care in low and middle income countries like ours.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/kumj.v9i3.6308 Kathmandu Univ Med J 2011;9(3):213-7  

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 417-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Sing Sun ◽  
Tai Pong Lam ◽  
Dan Wu

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for integration of mental health into primary care for a decade. In Western countries, around 15% to 25% of patients with common mental disorders including mood and anxiety disorders seek help from primary care physicians (PCPs). The rate is only about 5% in China. Aims: This article reviews the Chinese findings on the barriers to primary care for common mental disorders and how they compared with Western findings. Methods: A narrative literature review was conducted, focusing on literature published from mid-1990s in English or Chinese. Patient, PCP and health system factors were reviewed. Results: Although Chinese and Western findings show similar themes of barriers, the Chinese have stronger barriers in most aspects, including under-recognition of the need for treatment, stigma on mental illness, somatization, worries about taking psychiatric drugs, uncertainties in the role, competency and legitimacy of PCPs in mental health care and short consultation time. Conclusion: Current policies in China emphasize enhancement of mental health facilities and workforce in the community. Our review suggests that patients’ intention to seek help and PCPs’ competency in mental health care are other fundamental factors to be addressed.


Author(s):  
Marta Estrela ◽  
Maria Teresa Herdeiro ◽  
Pedro Lopes Ferreira ◽  
Fátima Roque

(1) Background: Mental disorders are a growing concern in the 21st century. The most prevalent common mental disorders include depression and anxiety. It is predicted that half of the population will at some point in their lives experience one or more mental disorders. Although common mental disorders are highly prevalent, some of the most significant related problems are the wide treatment gap and the excessive use of antidepressants, anxiolytics and sedatives/hypnotics, especially among older patients. (2) Methods: This study aimed to analyze mental health care in Portugal, with a focus on the consumption of antidepressants, anxiolytics, sedatives and hypnotics among older patients. (3) Results: The use of antidepressants, anxiolytics, sedatives and hypnotics has increased overall across Europe. In Portugal, a downward trend of sedatives and hypnotics consumption can be observed. Anxiolytics and antidepressants, on the other hand, have been increasing. Patients aged ≥60 years old consume more than half of the aforementioned drugs. (4) Conclusions: Mental health policies should be designed to improve the conscientious use of antidepressants, anxiolytics, sedatives and hypnotics, particularly among older adults.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S8-S8
Author(s):  
Jesus Perez ◽  
Clare Knight ◽  
Debra A Russo ◽  
Jan Stochl ◽  
Peter B Jones

Abstract Background Systematic reviews indicate that approximately one third of people with at-risk mental states for psychosis (ARMS) will transition to a psychotic disorder. Research in non-specialised services, such as primary care settings, has shown that far fewer make such a conversion. Nonetheless, psychotic experiences (PE) may also be linked to common mental disorders (CMD), particularly depression and anxiety, and still predict poor outcomes. Population studies modelling the co-occurrence of CMD and PE have found an underlying unitary psychopathological factor, with PE emerging towards its more severe end. We know little about the prevalence of and recovery from PE in primary mental health care, where most CMD are treated. One example of primary mental health care setting in England is the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme (https://www.england.nhs.uk/mental-health/adults/iapt/). The IAPT programme provides evidence-based psychological therapies for mild to moderate CMD across the UK National Health Service (NHS). IAPT services adhere to current diagnostic paradigms and, therefore, do not either measure or treat PE. We aimed to establish the prevalence of PE in a large sample of patients with CMD from the IAPT programme and compare recovery rates between patients with CMD and PE (CMD-P) and those without PE. Methods We used the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences - Positive 15-item Scale (CAPE-P15) to determine the prevalence of PE in patients with CMD receiving treatment from IAPT services across England. We employed the CAPE-P15 threshold score of 1.47, which identifies individuals with ARMS, and also a lower threshold of 1.30, chosen as within one standard error of measurement, in order to explore threshold effects in the association between PE and recovery. Patient-reported measures of depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) are routinely collected in IAPT services and determine ‘caseness’ before, during and after therapy. Using recovery rates (moving from ‘caseness’ to recovery) monitored nationally in the IAPT programme, we stratified patients according to the absence and presence of PE. Multi-group growth models estimated improvement trajectories for each group. Results 2,042 patients with CMD completed the CAPE-P15. The mean age was 39.8. The overall prevalence of CMD-P was 29.68% at CAPE-P15 threshold score for ARMS, i.e. 1.47, and 48.09% at threshold score 1.30. The overall recovery rate at threshold of 1.47 was 27.87% and 36.3% at 1.30. Recovery rates for those without PE were 58.92% and 62.43% for thresholds 1.47 and 1.30, respectively. Although patients with or without PE shared similar improvement trajectories, the initial severity of patients with CMD-P impeded their likelihood of recovery during treatment. Discussion At least one in four patients receiving treatment from IAPT services in primary care experience CMD-P. This significant group of people experience a lower recovery rate, with adverse implications not only for them but also for efficiency of services. Although recovery trajectories for this group showed improvement over therapy sessions, remittance of symptoms was insufficient to meet national IAPT standards of recovery. This patient group is not well-served by current interventions in primary care. This work forms part of a nation-wide NIHR research programme (TYPPEX; https://www.nihr.ac.uk/news/innovative-mental-health-study-launchesin-eastern-region) aiming to develop innovative therapies for people with CMD-P in primary care. Preliminary results related to feasibility and effectiveness of new therapeutic approaches will also be presented.


2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Hanlon

The explicit inclusion of mental health within the Sustainable Development Goals is a welcome development, borne out of powerful advocacy using public health, economic and human rights arguments. As funding comes on line for scale-up of evidence-based mental health care by task-sharing with primary care, it is time to take stock about care for people affected by severe mental illness (SMI). The existing evidence base for task shared care for SMI provides an imperative to get started, but is skewed towards relatively more affluent and urban populations in middle-income countries where specialist mental health professionals provide most of the care. Randomised, controlled trials and rigorous implementation research on task shared service models are underway which will go some way to improving understanding of the quality, safety, effectiveness and acceptability of more widely generalisable care for people with SMI. A sub-group of people with SMI have more complex and long-term needs for care, with a high risk of homelessness, imprisonment and human rights violations as family and social supports become overwhelmed. Case studies from non-governmental organisations provide examples of holistic approaches to rehabilitation, recovery and empowerment of people with SMI, but rigorous comparative studies are needed to identify the most efficient, effective and scalable approaches to care. Health system constraints are emerging as the over-riding barriers to successful task-sharing, highlighting a need to develop and evaluate chronic care models for people with SMI that succeed in reducing premature mortality, improving wellbeing and achieving better social outcomes. Addressing these evidence gaps is essential if task-sharing mental health care is going to deliver on its promise of promoting recovery for the full range of people affected by SMI.


Author(s):  
Anoop Krishna Gupta ◽  
Sulochana Joshi ◽  
Bikram Kafle ◽  
Ranjan Thapa ◽  
Manisha Chapagai ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pathways to care studies are feasible and tested means of finding the actual routes taken by patients before reaching proper care. In view of the predominance of nonprofessional service providers and the lack of previous large studies on pathways in Nepal, this multicenter study is needed. The aim of the study was to trace the various pathways and carers involved in mental health care; assess clinical variables such as the duration of untreated illness, clinical presentation and treatment; and compare geographically and culturally diverse landscapes. Methods This was a cross-sectional, convenience sampling study performed at 14 centers where new cases were being taken. The World Health Organization Study of the Pathways-to-Care Schedule was applied. The Nepali version of the encounter form was used. The data were collected between 17 September and 16 October 2020 and were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Additionally, perspectives from local investigators were collected and discussed. Results Most of the first carers were native/religious faith healers (28.2%), followed by psychiatrists (26%). The median duration for the first psychiatric consultation was 3 weeks. The duration of untreated illness was 30.72 ± 80.34 (median: 4) weeks, and the time taken for this journey was 94.99 ± 274.58 (median: 30) min. The longest delay from the onset of illness to psychiatric care was for epilepsy {90.0 ± 199.0 (median: 25.5)} weeks, followed by neurotic illness {22.89 ± 73.45 (median: 2)} and psychotic illness {10.54 ± 18.28 (median: 2)} weeks. Overall, most patients with severe mental illnesses (SMIs) had their first contact with faithhealers (49%), then met with medical doctors (13%) or psychiatrists (28%). Marked differences in clinical presentation surfaced when hilly centers were compared with the Terai belt. Conclusions Faith healers, general practitioners and hospital doctors are major carers, and the means of educating them for proper referral can be considered. The investigators see several hindrances and opportunities in the studied pathways. The employment of more mental health professionals and better mental health advocacy, public awareness programs and school education are suggested strategies to improve proper mental health care.


Author(s):  
J. E. M. Nakku ◽  
S. D. Rathod ◽  
E. C. Garman ◽  
J. Ssebunnya ◽  
S. Kangere ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The burden of mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries is large. Yet there is a major treatment gap for these disorders which can be reduced by integrating the care of mental disorders in primary care. Aim We aimed to evaluate the impact of a district mental health care plan (MHCP) on contact coverage for and detection of mental disorders, as well as impact on mental health symptom severity and individual functioning in rural Uganda. Results For adults who attended primary care facilities, there was an immediate positive effect of the MHCP on clinical detection at 3 months although this was not sustained at 12 months. Those who were treated in primary care experienced significant reductions in symptom severity and functional impairment over 12 months. There was negligible change in population-level contact coverage for depression and alcohol use disorder. Conclusion The study found that it is possible to integrate mental health care into primary care in rural Uganda. Treatment by trained primary care workers improves clinical and functioning outcomes for depression, psychosis and epilepsy. Challenges remain in accessing the men for care, sustaining the improvement in detection over time, and creating demand for services among those with presumed need.


2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 577-577
Author(s):  
M. Santos ◽  
A.E. Ribeiro

Mental condition is determined by a multiplicity of factors, such as biological, individual, social, economic and environmental. Mental and behavioural disorders are estimated to account for 13% of the global burden of disease, according to the World Health Organization. Despite this evidence, mental health is a neglected and an under-researched area of public health, particularly in low-and-middle-income-countries (LMICs).Recent studies found an association between common mental disorders (CMD), such as depression and anxiety, and poverty. However, investigation on several specific poverty indicators has revealed a much more complex scenario.A recent meta-analysis showed that variables such as education, food insecurity, housing, social class, socio-economic status and financial stress are consistently and strongly associated with CMD. In turn, the disabling effects of mental disorders impair the ability of persons to self-sustain, reflecting a relationship between poverty and mental disorders that has been likened to a vicious cycle.The authors emphasize the need for improvement of LMICs mental health policies.


Author(s):  
Roxanne Gaspersz ◽  
Monique H.W. Frings-Dresen ◽  
Judith K. Sluiter

Abstract Objective: The purpose of the study was to assess common mental disorders and the related use and need for mental health care among clinically not yet active and clinically active medical students. Methods: All medical students (n=2266) at one Dutch medical university were approached. Students from study years 1–4 were defined as clinically not yet active and students from study years 5 and 6 as clinically active. An electronic survey was used to detect common mental disorders depression (BSI-DEP), anxiety (BSI-ANG), stress (4DSQ) and post-traumatic stress disorder (IES). The use of mental health services in the past 3 months and the need for mental health services were asked for. The prevalence of common mental disorders, the use and need for mental health services and differences between groups were calculated. Results: The response rate was 52%: 814 clinically not yet active and 316 clinically active students. The prevalence of common mental disorders among clinically not yet active and clinically active students was 54% and 48%, respectively. The use of mental health services was 14% in clinically not yet active and 12% in clinically active students with common mental disorders (n.s.). The need for mental health services by clinically not yet active and clinically active students was 52% and 46%, respectively (n.s.). Conclusions: The prevalence of probable common mental disorders are higher among clinically not yet active than among clinically active students. The need of mental health services exceeds use, but is the same in the two groups of students.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document