Dataset Information

Improving Access to Mental Health Care by Delivering Psychotherapeutic Care in the Workplace: A Cross-Sectional Exploratory Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Common mental disorders like mood and anxiety disorders and somatoform disorders have high costs, yet under-treatment is still frequent. Many people with common mental disorders are employed, so the workplace is potentially a suitable context in which to provide early treatment. Our study investigates whether a change of setting (workplace versus standard care) improves access to treatment for common mental disorders.

Methods

Conditional latent profile analysis was applied to identify user profiles for work ability (WAI), clinical symptoms like depression (patient health questionnaire depression, PHQ-9), health-related quality of life (QoL, SF-12), and work-related stress (Maslach Burnout Inventory, irritation scale). Patients were recruited consecutively, via psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace (n = 174) or psychotherapeutic consultation in outpatient care (n = 193).

Results

We identified four user profiles in our model: 'severe' (n = 99), 'moderate I-low QoL' (n = 88), 'moderate II-low work ability' (n = 83), and 'at risk' (n = 97). The 'at risk' profile encompassed individuals with reduced work ability (36.0, 34.73 to 37.37), only mild clinical symptoms (PHQ-9 5.7, 4.92 to 6.53), no signs of work-related stress and good quality of life. A higher proportion of the 'at risk' group than of the 'severe' group sought help via the psychotherapeutic consultation in the workplace (OR 0.287, P < 0.01); this effect remained after controlling for gender.

Conclusions

Offering secondary mental health care in the workplace is feasible and accepted by users. Offering treatment in the workplace as an alternative to standard outpatient settings is a viable strategy for improving access to treatment for common mental disorders.

SUBMITTER: Rothermund E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5215922 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn 2017, the Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement launched the Connected Medicine collaborative to support the implementation, spread and adaptation of 2 innovative remote consult solutions - the Champlain Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation (BASE) eConsult service and the Rapid Access to Consultative Expertise (RACE) service - across Canada. We evaluated the impact of the programs implemented through the collaborative.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of data from provincial teams that participated in the Connected Medicine collaborative, which took place between June 2017 and December 2018 in 7 provinces across Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador). Data included utilization data collected automatically by the BASE and RACE services and, where available, responses to surveys completed by primary care providers at the end of each case. We assessed programs on the following outcomes: usage (i.e., number of cases completed, average specialist response time), number of specialties available, impact on primary care provider's decision to refer and impact on emergency department visits. We performed descriptive analyses.ResultsTen provincial teams participated in the collaborative and implemented or adapted either the RACE service (4 teams), the BASE service (5 teams) or a combination of the 2 services (1 team). Average monthly case volume per team ranged from 14.7 to 424.5. All programs offered multispecialty access, with specialists from 5 to 37 specialty groups available. Specialists responded to eConsults within 7 days in 80% (n = 294/368) to 93% (n = 164/176) of cases. Six programs provided survey data on avoidance of referrals, which occurred in 48% (n = 667/1389) to 76% (n = 302/398) of cases. Two programs reported on the avoidance of potential emergency department visits, noting that originally considered referrals were avoided in 28% (n = 138/492) and 74% (n = 127/171) of cases, respectively.InterpretationThe 2 innovative virtual care solutions implemented through the Connected Medicine collaborative received widespread usage and affected primary care providers' decisions to refer patients to specialists. The impact of these models of care in multiple settings shows that they are an effective means to move beyond the pilot stage and achieve spread and scale.

Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact both in general and mental healthcare, challenged the health systems worldwide, and affected their capacity to deliver essential health services. We aimed to describe perceived changes in ease of access to general and mental healthcare among patients with a diagnosis of depression and/or unhealthy alcohol use in Colombia.MethodsThis study is embedded in the DIADA project, a multicenter implementation research study aimed at evaluating the integration of mental healthcare in primary care in Colombia. Between November 2020 and August 2021, we conducted a COVID-19 pandemic impact assessment in a cohort of participants with newly diagnosed depression and/or unhealthy alcohol use part of DIADA project. We assessed the ease of access and factors related to perceived ease of access to general or mental healthcare, during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results836 participants completed the COVID-19 pandemic impact assessment. About 30% of participants considered their mental health to be worse during the pandemic and 84.3% perceived access to general healthcare to be worse during the pandemic. Most of participants (85.8%) were unable to assess access to mental health services, but a significant proportion considered it to be worse. Experiencing worse ease of access to general healthcare was more frequent among women, patients with diagnosis of depression, and patients with comorbidities. Experiencing worse ease of access to mental healthcare was more frequent among patients aged between 30 and 49.9 years, from socioeconomic status between 4 and 6, affiliated to the contributive social security regime, attending urban study sites, and those who perceived their mental health was worse during the pandemic.DiscussionDespite the overall perception of worse mental health during the pandemic, the use of mental healthcare was low compared to general healthcare. Ease of access was perceived to be worse compared to pre-pandemic. Ease of access and access were affected by geographical study site, socioeconomic status, age and gender. Our findings highlight the need for improved communication between patients and institutions, tailored strategies to adapt the healthcare provision to patients' characteristics, and continued efforts to strengthen the role of mental healthcare provision in primary care.

Project description:BackgroundIntegration of mental healthcare into non-specialist settings is advocated to expand access to care for people with severe mental disorders (SMD) in low-income countries. However, the impact upon equitable access for disenfranchised members of society has not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to (1) estimate contact coverage for SMD of a new service in primary healthcare (PHC) in a rural Ethiopian district, and (2) investigate equity of access for rural residents, women, people with physical impairments and people of low socio-economic status.MethodsCommunity key informants were trained to identify and refer people with probable SMD in Sodo district, south-central Ethiopia, using vignettes of typical presentations. Records of those referred to the new PHC-based service were linked to healthcare records to identify people who engaged with care and non-engagers over a 6 month period. Standardised interviews by psychiatric nurses were used to confirm the diagnosis in those attending PHC. Non-engagers were visited in their homes and administered the Psychosis Symptom Questionnaire. Socio-economic status, discrimination, disability, substance use, social support and distance to the nearest health facility were measured.ResultsContact coverage for the new service was estimated to be 81.3% (300 engaged out of 369 probable cases of SMD identified). Reimbursement for transport and time may have elevated coverage estimates. In the fully adjusted multivariable model, rural residents had 3.81 increased odds (95% CI 1.22, 11.89) of not accessing care, in part due to geographical distance from the health facility (odds ratio 3.37 (1.12, 10.12)) for people living more than 180 min away. There was no association with lower socioeconomic status, female gender or physical impairment. Higher levels of functional impairment were associated with increased odds of engagement. Amongst non-engagers, the most frequently endorsed barriers were thinking the problem would get better by itself and concerns about the cost of treatment.ConclusionIntegrating mental healthcare into primary care can achieve high levels of coverage in a rural African setting, which is equitable with respect to gender and socio-economic status. Service outreach into the community may be needed to achieve better contact coverage for rural residents.

Project description:ObjectiveTo simulate the impact on population mental health indicators of allowing people to book some Medicare-subsidised sessions with psychologists and other mental health care professionals without a referral (direct access), and of increasing the annual growth rate in specialist mental health care capacity (consultations).DesignSystem dynamics model, calibrated using historical time series data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, HealthStats NSW, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, and the Australian Early Development Census. Parameter values that could not be derived from these sources were estimated by constrained optimisation.SettingNew South Wales, 1 September 2021 - 1 September 2028.Main outcome measuresProjected mental health-related emergency department presentations, hospitalisations following self-harm, and deaths by suicide, both overall and for people aged 15-24 years.ResultsDirect access (for 10-50% of people requiring specialist mental health care) would lead to increases in the numbers of mental health-related emergency department presentations (0.33-1.68% of baseline), hospitalisations with self-harm (0.16-0.77%), and deaths by suicide (0.19-0.90%), as waiting times for consultations would increase, leading to disengagement and consequently to increases in adverse outcomes. Increasing the annual rate of growth of mental health service capacity (two- to fivefold) would reduce the frequency of all three outcomes; combining direct access to a proportion of services with increased growth in capacity achieved substantially greater gains than an increase in service capacity alone. A fivefold increase in the annual service growth rate would increase capacity by 71.6% by the end of 2028, compared with current projections; combined with direct access to 50% of mental health consultations, 26 616 emergency department presentations (3.6%), 1199 hospitalisations following self-harm (1.9%), and 158 deaths by suicide (2.1%) could be averted.ConclusionThe optimal combination of increased service capacity growth (fivefold) and direct access (50% of consultations) would have double the impact over seven years of accelerated capacity growth alone. Our model highlights the risks of implementing individual reforms without knowledge of their overall system effect.

Project description:BackgroundThe process of immigration is associated with poor mental and physical health. While the workplace represents an important context of social integration, previous studies evaluating the effect of discrimination experienced in the workplace found worse mental health status among immigrants. The aim of this study was to investigate whether self-perceived workplace discrimination has any role in the mental health status of immigrants living and working in Italy, evaluating the contribution of other personal experiences, such as loneliness and life satisfaction.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted on a sample of 12,408 immigrants (aged 15-64) living and working in Italy. Data were derived from the first national survey on immigrants carried out by the Italian National Institute of Statistics (Istat). Mental health status was measured through the Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the SF-12 questionnaire. A linear multivariate linear regression was carried out to evaluate the association between mental health status, self-perceived workplace discrimination, and sociodemographic factors; path analysis was used to quantify the mediation effect of self-perceived loneliness, level of life satisfaction, and the Physical Component Summary (PCS).ResultsMental health status was inversely associated (p < 0.001) with self-perceived workplace discrimination (β:-1.737), self-perceived loneliness (β:-2.653), and physical health status (β:-0.089); it was directly associated with level of life satisfaction (β:1.122). As confirmed by the path analysis, the effect of self-perceived workplace discrimination on MCS was mediated by the other factors considered: self-perceived loneliness (11.9%), level of life satisfaction (20.7%), and physical health status (3.9%).ConclusionsOur study suggests that self-perceived workplace discrimination is associated with worse mental health status in immigrant workers through personal experiences in the workplace and explains the effect of the exposure to workplace discrimination on immigrants' psychological well-being. Our findings suggest that an overall public health response is needed to facilitate the social integration of immigrants and their access to health services, particularly those services that address mental health issues.

Project description:Purpose Disclosure of mental illness to a supervisor can have positive (e.g. supervisor support) and negative consequences (e.g. stigma). However, research on the association between disclosure and sustainable employability and well-being at work is scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the disclosure decision (yes/no), experiences with the decision (positive/negative) and sustainable employment and well-being at work among military personnel with mental illness (N = 323). Methods A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted. Descriptive and regression (linear and ordinal) analyses were performed. Comparisons were made between those with positive and negative disclosure experiences. Results Disclosure decision (yes/no) was not significantly associated with any of the measures of sustainable employability and well-being at work. However, positive disclosure experiences were significantly associated with higher scores on almost all measures of sustainable employability and well-being at work. Those with negative disclosure experiences reported significantly more shame (Mpos = 2.42, Mneg = 2.78, p < .05) and discrimination (Mpos = 1.70, Mneg = 2.84, p < .001). Those with a positive disclosure experience, reported significantly more supervisor support (Mpos = 3.20, Mneg = 1.94, p < .001). Conclusion We did not find evidence that the disclosure decision itself is related to measures of sustainable employment and well-being at work. In contrast, how participants had experienced their (non-)disclosure decision was significantly related to almost all measures. This emphasizes the importance of the work environments reactions to disclosure and mental illness in the workplace. Future research and interventions should focus on increasing the likelihood of positive disclosure experiences through creating a more inclusive work environment, with more supervisor support and less stigma.