scholarly journals Current State-of-art and Future Perspective of Occupational Mental Health in Japan

2009 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-222
Author(s):  
Norito Kawakami
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Seok Min Moon ◽  
Sakthivel Rajan Rajaram Manoharan

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra-Raluca Gatej ◽  
Audri Lamers ◽  
Robert Vermeiren ◽  
Lieke van Domburgh

Severe behaviour problems (SBPs) in early childhood include oppositional and aggressive behaviours and predict negative mental health outcomes later in life. Although effective treatments for this group are available and numerous clinical practice guidelines have been developed to facilitate the incorporation of evidence-based treatments in clinical decision-making (NICE, 2013), many children with SBPs remain unresponsive to treatment (Lahey & Waldman, 2012). At present, it is unknown how many countries in Europe possess official clinical guidelines for SBPs diagnosis and treatment and what is their perceived utility. The aim was to create an inventory of clinical guidelines (and associated critical needs) for the diagnostics and treatment of SBPs in youth mental health across Europe according to academic experts and mental health clinicians’ opinions. To investigate the aim, two separate online semi-structured questionnaires were used, one directed at academics (N=28 academic experts; 23 countries), and the other at clinicians (N=124 clinicians; 24 countries). Three key results were highlighted. First, guidelines for SBPs are perceived as beneficial by both experts and clinicians. However, their implementation needs to be reinforced and content better adapted to daily practice. Improvements may include taking a multifactorial approach to assessment and treatment, involving the systems around the child, and multidisciplinary collaboration. Second, academic experts and clinicians support the need for further developing national / European guidelines. Finally, future guidelines should address current challenges identified by clinicians to be more applicable to daily practice.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Owen ◽  
Louise Crouch-Read ◽  
Matthew Smith ◽  
Paul Fisher

Abstract For more than a decade, Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) has been training a new workforce of psychological therapists. Despite evidence of stress and burnout both in trainee mental health professionals, and qualified IAPT clinicians, little is known about these topics in IAPT trainees. Consequently, this systematic review sought to establish the current state of the literature regarding stress and burnout in IAPT trainees. Electronic databases were searched to identify all published and available unpublished work relating to the topic. On the basis of pre-established eligibility criteria, eight studies (including six unpublished doctoral theses) were identified and assessed for quality. This review identifies that research into the experience of IAPT trainees is under-developed. Existing evidence tentatively suggests that IAPT trainees may experience levels of stress and burnout that are higher than their qualified peers and among the higher end of healthcare professionals more generally. The experience of fulfilling dual roles as mental health professionals and university students concurrently appears to be a significant source of stress for IAPT trainees. More research regarding the levels and sources of stress and burnout in IAPT trainees is urgently needed to confirm and extend these findings. Recommendations for future research in the area are given. Key learning aims (1) To establish the current state of the literature regarding stress and burnout in IAPT trainees. (2) To raise practitioner, service and education-provider awareness regarding the levels and perceived sources of stress and burnout in IAPT trainees. (3) To make recommendations regarding future research on the topic.


2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucie Stejskalova ◽  
Zdenek Dvorak ◽  
Petr Pavek

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayra Anna Martin-Key ◽  
Benedetta Spadaro ◽  
Erin Funnell ◽  
Eleanor Jane Barker ◽  
Thea Sofie Schei ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Given the role digital technologies are likely to play in the future of mental healthcare, there is a need for a comprehensive appraisal of the current state and validity (i.e., screening/diagnostic accuracy) of digital mental health assessments. OBJECTIVE To explore the current state and validity of question-and-answer-based digital tools for diagnosing and screening psychiatric conditions in adults. METHODS This systematic review was based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework and was carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ASSIA, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for articles published between 2005 and 2020. A descriptive evaluation of the study characteristics and digital solutions and a quantitative appraisal of the screening/diagnostic accuracy of the included tools was conducted. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) guidelines. RESULTS A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria, with the most frequently evaluated conditions encompassing generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), major depressive disorder (MDD), and any depressive disorder. The majority of the studies employed digitized versions of existing pen-and-paper questionnaires, with findings revealing poor to excellent screening/diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity = 0.36-1.00, specificity = 0.37-1.00, AUC = 0.57-0.98) and a high risk of bias for most of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS The current state of the field of digital mental health tools is in its early stages and high-quality evidence is lacking. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/25382


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document