scholarly journals Mental health crisis in midlife – a proposed research agenda

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawid Gondek ◽  
Bettina Moltrecht ◽  
George Ploubidis

There is a growing amount of evidence indicating increased levels of psychological distress, suicide rates and decreased well-being in midlife (age 45-55). We refer to this phenomenon as the ‘midlife mental health crisis’. As there is little empirical evidence or theoretical grounds to explain the midlife mental health crisis, we propose a research agenda. In order to facilitate further research, we consulted members of public, mental health professionals and researchers on potential reasons for the midlife mental health crisis. Subsequently, we translated those into research questions testable with the British birth cohorts. We propose a series of studies using three statistical modelling approaches: descriptive (what is the midlife mental health crisis?), predictive (who is at increased risk of experiencing the midlife mental health crisis?) and explanatory (what are the processes leading to the midlife mental health crisis?).

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawid Gondek ◽  
Bettina Moltrecht ◽  
George Ploubidis

There is a growing amount of evidence indicating increased levels of psychological distress, suicide rates and decreased well-being in midlife (age 45-55). We refer to this phenomenon as the ‘midlife mental health crisis’. As there is little empirical evidence or theoretical grounds to explain the midlife mental health crisis, we propose a research agenda. In order to facilitate further research, we consulted members of public, mental health professionals and researchers on potential reasons for the midlife mental health crisis. Subsequently, we translated those into research questions testable with the British birth cohorts. We propose a series of studies using three statistical modelling approaches: descriptive (what is the midlife mental health crisis?), predictive (who is at increased risk of experiencing the midlife mental health crisis?) and explanatory (what are the processes leading to the midlife mental health crisis?).


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-76
Author(s):  
Marsha Lesley

OBJECTIVE: To raise awareness of the potential for moral injury in nurses working on the frontlines of COVID-19 patient care and to present aspects of mental functioning that may increase the likelihood of psychological distress. Approaches that draw on psychoanalytic thinking to support frontline nurses’ mental health are explained. METHOD: This article draws on recent work that is available from multiple sources, including published journal articles on moral injury, recent reports from news services highlighting the crisis state of the pandemic and effects on nurses, established literature on the structural model of the mind, and recent webinars and online lectures addressing mental health crisis interventions. The author draws on expertise from years of training in the Adult Psychoanalytic Training Program at the Michigan Psychoanalytic Institute and graduation as an academic analyst. RESULTS: How nurses navigate moral hazards inherent in the current state of frontline health care may depend on their existing ego strengths and levels of self-blame and guilt from a harsh superego. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health professionals need to be aware of the mental minefields that frontline nurses must navigate when providing care that, due to circumstances beyond their control, may be morally ambiguous. Educating nurses about the meaning of their own emotional and psychic responses amid the realities in the field may help to decrease the damaging effects of moral injury.


Subject India's efforts to address a mental health crisis. Significance The Indian government is aiming to convert 150,000 primary health centres into health and wellness centres (HWCs) providing comprehensive care, including management of mental disorders. Its plans for secondary and tertiary healthcare include medical insurance for poorer families that will cover treatment of mental illness. According to a 2016 study conducted by India’s National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), 150 million out of the country’s 1.3 billion people urgently need mental healthcare. Impacts Expanding mental healthcare infrastructure could lead to an overemphasis on a biomedical model of treatment for mental health disorders. The government will come under pressure to increase funding for mental health professionals as well as technological resources. Future budgets will be key indicators of the government’s commitment to its National Mental Health Programme.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 94-100
Author(s):  
Saba Khurshid ◽  
Sidra Mumtaz ◽  
Hafsa Khalil Toor ◽  
Rubina Hanif

The outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic is constantly posing warning and creating mental health crisis among people without any discrimination. Therefore, the current study purpose is to explore mental health upheaval and transition in future perspectives due to COVID-19. Using exploratory study design, semi structure interviews were conducted. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed by using Thematic Content Analysis. The major themes which were identified showed that COVID-19 is constantly eliciting panic and mental health issues such as anxiety, stress, and depression, fears of death, xenophobia, OCD and uncertainty about future among general population. Results also indicated the major transition in public future perspectives and perception. Concern related to adjustability in life after pandemic is major emerging future concern among Pakistani People. During pandemic outbreak, people are becoming vulnerable to different mental health problems. To overcome these issues successfully, role of mental health professionals cannot be denied. There is strong need to devise activities and strategies which help people to increase resilience and build strong relationships during the period of social distancing. This paper gives a deep insight into mental health problems among general population due to COVID-19 and it also implicates need of psychological services to overcome these issues.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (18) ◽  
pp. 1-122
Author(s):  
David Osborn ◽  
Danielle Lamb ◽  
Alastair Canaway ◽  
Michael Davidson ◽  
Graziella Favarato ◽  
...  

Background For people in mental health crisis, acute day units provide daily structured sessions and peer support in non-residential settings as an alternative to crisis resolution teams. Objectives To investigate the provision, effectiveness, intervention acceptability and re-admission rates of acute day units. Design Work package 1 – mapping and national questionnaire survey of acute day units. Work package 2.1 – cohort study comparing outcomes during a 6-month period between acute day unit and crisis resolution team participants. Work package 2.2 – qualitative interviews with staff and service users of acute day units. Work package 3 – a cohort study within the Mental Health Minimum Data Set exploring re-admissions to acute care over 6 months. A patient and public involvement group supported the study throughout. Setting and participants Work package 1 – all non-residential acute day units (NHS and voluntary sector) in England. Work packages 2.1 and 2.2 – four NHS trusts with staff, service users and carers in acute day units and crisis resolution teams. Work package 3 – all individuals using mental health NHS trusts in England. Results Work package 1 – we identified 27 acute day units in 17 out of 58 trusts. Acute day units are typically available on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., providing a wide range of interventions and a multidisciplinary team, including clinicians, and having an average attendance of 5 weeks. Work package 2.1 – we recruited 744 participants (acute day units, n = 431; crisis resolution teams, n = 312). In the primary analysis, 21% of acute day unit participants (vs. 23% of crisis resolution team participants) were re-admitted to acute mental health services over 6 months. There was no statistically significant difference in the fully adjusted model (acute day unit hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.14; p = 0.20), with highly heterogeneous results between trusts. Acute day unit participants had higher satisfaction and well-being scores and lower depression scores than crisis resolution team participants. The health economics analysis found no difference in resource use or cost between the acute day unit and crisis resolution team groups in the fully adjusted analysis. Work package 2.2 – 36 people were interviewed (acute day unit staff, n = 12; service users, n = 21; carers, n = 3). There was an overwhelming consensus that acute day units are highly valued. Service users found the high amount of contact time and staff continuity, peer support and structure provided by acute day units particularly beneficial. Staff also valued providing continuity, building strong therapeutic relationships and providing a variety of flexible, personalised support. Work package 3 – of 231,998 individuals discharged from acute care (crisis resolution team, acute day unit or inpatient ward), 21.4% were re-admitted for acute treatment within 6 months, with women, single people, people of mixed or black ethnicity, those living in more deprived areas and those in the severe psychosis care cluster being more likely to be re-admitted. Little variation in re-admissions was explained at the trust level, or between trusts with and trusts without acute day units (adjusted odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.15). Limitations In work package 1, some of the information is likely to be incomplete as a result of trusts’ self-reporting. There may have been recruitment bias in work packages 2.1 and 2.2. Part of the health economics analysis relied on clinical Health of the Nations Outcome Scale ratings. The Mental Health Minimum Data Set did not contain a variable identifying acute day units, and some covariates had a considerable number of missing data. Conclusions Acute day units are not provided routinely in the NHS but are highly valued by staff and service users, giving better outcomes in terms of satisfaction, well-being and depression than, and no significant differences in risk of re-admission or increased costs from, crisis resolution teams. Future work should investigate wider health and care system structures and the place of acute day units within them; the development of a model of best practice for acute day units; and staff turnover and well-being (including the impacts of these on care). Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


Author(s):  
Reena Kapoor

Crisis calls are a common occurrence in correctional settings. Psychiatrists are often called upon to triage and manage such events. Requests for urgent psychiatric evaluations can come from many sources, including security staff, non-psychiatric physicians, mental health staff, courts, attorneys, and family members. Psychiatrists responding to these requests for evaluation may feel tremendous pressure to reach a conclusion that is consistent with the opinions of the requesting party. However, maintaining an independent and therapeutic stance when conducting crisis evaluations is crucial. Some aspects of psychiatric evaluations in crisis situations are unique to the correctional environment: evaluations at cell-side, video recording, and leadership by security staff rather than medical professionals. Nonetheless, correctional psychiatrists should be guided by the same principles of medical ethics that apply to patient care in the community, placing the patient’s well-being above all other concerns. They should strive, when possible, to conduct a thorough assessment in a confidential setting. In considering how best to resolve the crisis and care for the patient, they should err on the side of caution and recommend placement in a safe and therapeutic setting, at least until a multidisciplinary team can consider other options. Finally, they should document the encounter carefully, articulating the rationale for the chosen course of action. This chapter reviews the pragmatics of evaluating and managing many common correctional events that lead to mental health crisis calls and discusses the range of concerns, the typical practices and procedures used in correctional settings, and the types of interventions that are best used.


Author(s):  
James P Pandarakalam

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an increased burden on all medical services and healthcare professionals are applying new strategies to cope with the added demands. During the pandemic mental healthcare services in many parts of the world have been reorganised to incorporate modern technology and maintain efficient service delivery. Mental health professionals are playing a major role in alleviating the suffering resulting from this pandemic. A selective survey of the literature, including narrative reviews, was carried out to study the implications of digital psychiatry. Historically, epidemics have had a substantial effect on mental health and general health services. Telehealth appears to be the right solution to the present mental health crisis, but technology cannot substitute for human presence and proximity in mental health services, so the newer interventions have advantages and disadvantages. Remote methods of therapy are likely to continue to be used and proper assessment of these new ways of working in psychiatry is required. In the post-pandemic period, the challenge will be to combine digital and in-person therapies. Discussions about digital revolution in the field of psychiatry should be modified to digital evolution.


2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. xiii-xviii
Author(s):  
Suzie C. Nelson ◽  
Jessica K. Jeffrey ◽  
Mark S. Borer ◽  
Barry D. Sarvet

1987 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Françoise Boudreau

This paper examines the current socio-political language in the formulation of mental health policy in Ontario and Quebec. “Before long,” coherent and rational policy has been promised in each province to “solve” today's mental health crisis—often identified as that of “deinstitutionaliztion.” However, there is not just one view. Here, we examine the arguments presented in the form of briefs, reports, and working documents on the part of mental health professionals, governments and unions, patient groups, and volunteer organizations in both provinces. We analyze the areas of convergence and divergence and attempt to make sense of this mass of material so important in the formulation of a sensible and sensitive government policy of action.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document