Dataset Information

Associative stigma among mental health professionals in Singapore: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

(1) Investigate and explore whether different classes of associative stigma (the process by which a person experiences stigmatisation as a result of an association with another stigmatised person) could be identified using latent class analysis; (2) determine the sociodemographic and employment-related correlates of associative stigma and (3) examine the relationship between associative stigma and job satisfaction, among mental health professionals.

Design

Cross-sectional online survey.

Participants

Doctors, nurses and allied health staff, working in Singapore.

Methods

Staff (n=462) completed an online survey, which comprised 11 associative stigma items and also captured sociodemographic and job satisfaction-related information. Latent class analysis was used to classify associative stigma on patterns of observed categorical variables. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine associations between sociodemographic and employment-related factors and the different classes, while multiple linear regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between associative stigma and job satisfaction.

Results

The latent class analysis revealed that items formed a three-class model where the classes were classified as 'no/low associative stigma', 'moderate associative stigma' and 'high associative stigma'. 48.7%, 40.5% and 10.8% of the population comprised no/low, moderate and high associative stigma classes, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression showed that years of service and occupation were significantly associated with moderate associative stigma, while factors associated with high associative stigma were education, ethnicity and occupation. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that high associative stigma was significantly associated with lower job satisfaction scores.

Conclusion

Associative stigma was not uncommon among mental health professionals and was associated with sociodemographic factors and poorer job satisfaction. Associative stigma has received comparatively little attention from empirical researchers and continued efforts to address this understudied yet important construct in conjunction with future efforts to dispel misconceptions related to mental illnesses are needed.

SUBMITTER: Picco L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6629392 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Associative stigma among mental health professionals in Singapore: a cross-sectional study.

Picco Louisa L Chang Sherilyn S Abdin Edimansyah E Chua Boon Yiang BY Yuan Qi Q Vaingankar Janhavi Ajit JA Ong Samantha S Yow Kah Lai KL Chua Hong Choon HC Chong Siow Ann SA Subramaniam Mythily M

BMJ open 20190711 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>(1) Investigate and explore whether different classes of associative stigma (the process by which a person experiences stigmatisation as a result of an association with another stigmatised person) could be identified using latent class analysis; (2) determine the sociodemographic and employment-related correlates of associative stigma and (3) examine the relationship between associative stigma and job satisfaction, among mental health professionals.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-section ...[more]

PMID: 31300500

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess stigma towards people with mental illness among Singapore medical and nursing students using the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC), and to examine the relationship of students' stigmatising attitudes with sociodemographic and education factors. DESIGN AND SETTING:Cross-sectional study conducted in Singapore PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted among 1002 healthcare (502?medical and 500?nursing) students during April to September 2016. Students had to be Singapore citizens or permanent residents and enrolled in public educational institutions to be included in the study. The mean (SD) age of the participants was 21.3 (3.3) years, with the majority being females (71.1%). 75.2% of the participants were Chinese, 14.1% were Malays, and 10.7% were either Indians or of other ethnicity. METHODS:Factor analysis was conducted to validate the OMS-HC scale in the study sample and to examine its factor structure. Descriptive statistics and multivariate linear regression were used to examine sociodemographic and education correlates. RESULTS:Factor analysis revealed a three-factor structure with 14 items. The factors were labelled as attitudes towards help-seeking and people with mental illness, social distance and disclosure. Multivariable linear regression analysis showed that medical students were found to be associated with lower total OMS-HC scores (P<0.05), less negative attitudes (P<0.001) and greater disclosure (P<0.05) than nursing students. Students who had a monthly household income of below S$4000 had more unfavourable attitudes than those with an income of SGD$10 000 and above (P<0.05). Having attended clinical placement was associated with more negative attitudes (P<0.05) among the students. CONCLUSION:Healthcare students generally possessed positive attitudes towards help-seeking and persons with mental illness, though they preferred not to disclose their own mental health condition. Academic curriculum may need to enhance the component of mental health training, particularly on reducing stigma in certain groups of students.

Project description:IntroductionResearch shows that mental health-related stigma, stereotypes, and prejudices have a negative impact on the patients themselves as well as on their families and social entourage. Healthcare professionals, whose expertise and professional ethos are historically acknowledged by public opinion, are expected to play a major role in combating discrimination against psychiatric patients. In this study, we aimed to assess the attitudes of Greek healthcare professionals toward mental illness and people suffering from it.Materials and methodsIt is a non-interventional, analytic study, in which 479 health workers from a tertiary hospital in Thessaloniki, Greece, participated. Every single hospital service -except the personnel of the Psychiatric Clinic- was included in our study: from the cleaning service to the administrative staff and the auxiliary staff such as stretcher carriers, food and nutrition services' staff, and social workers, the nursing staff, and finally the attending physicians, taking into consideration that the psychiatric patient, from the moment he/she enters the hospital, consecutively gets in contact with every work grade of the healthcare establishment. Participants' attitudes concerning mental illness have been evaluated using the Opinions about Mental Illness Scale (OMI), the Social Distance Scale (SDS), and the Level of Contact Report (LCR-12).ResultsDespite the high level of familiarity [as evaluated with LCR-12; mean score (μ): 8.82 ± 1.73], the employees displayed a rather poor willingness to interact with psychiatric patients (as measured with SDS; μ:11.68 ± 4.28), and endorsed significant prejudice toward individuals with mental disorders (assessed using OMI subscales; Social Discrimination μ: 22.99 ± 12.08, Social Restriction μ: 17.45 ± 9.07, Social Care μ: 21.04 ± 4.12, Social Integration μ: 16.38 ± 4.68, Etiology μ: 9.80 ± 4.95). Age and education stood out as the main determinants of participants' attitudes, with younger and highly educated participants to have shown a relatively refined profile.ConclusionThese results are not significantly improved compared to those of previous decades in Greek healthcare professionals and call for critical reflection and targeted stigma-reduction efforts.

Project description:Objectives: To assess prevalence and its associated factors of perceived stigma among patients with mental disorders who had appointment for treatment at Debre Markos, Finote Selam, and Felege Hiwot Hospitals, Ethiopia, 2019. Methods: At selected hospitals in the Amhara Region, an institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 February to 1 March 2019. Participants were selected using systematic random sampling technique and data were collected using a standardized questionnaire. The Internalized Stigma Scale was designed to examine the stigma associated with mental disorders. The data were coded and enter into Epi data version 4.4.2.1 before being exported to SPSS version 20 for analysis. Odds ratios and 95% confidence interval were used to show the strength of the association. Results: A total of 610 participants were participated, with a response rate of 98.6%, and 215 (35.2%) of them reported a high level of perceived stigma. Being single (adjusted odds ratio = 1.84, 95% confidence interval: 1.12, 3.02), accessing their medication freely (adjusted odds ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval: 1.08, 2.67), having suicidal thoughts (adjusted odds ratio = 1.95, 95% confidence interval: 1.25, 3.03), having low social support (adjusted odds ratio = 5.09, 95% confidence interval: 2.95, 8.76), age 25–34 years (adjusted odds ratio = 1.94, 95% confidence interval: 1.11, 3.40), age 35–44 years (adjusted odds ratio = 2.10, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.18), and age > 44 years (adjusted odds ratio = 3.48, 95% confidence interval: 1.67, 7.24) were revealed to be significantly associated with high perceived stigma after multivariable logistic regression analysis (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The prevalence of high perceived stigma was 35.2%, which is found to be high among people who have mental disorders in this study. Being single, accessing their medication freely, having suicidal thoughts, having low social support, and being within the age of (25–34), (35–44), > 44 were all found to be significantly associated with high perceived stigma (p < 0.05). But married, access medication by fee, have no suicidal thought, having moderate and strong social support, and young age were significantly associated with low perceived stigma.

Project description:Despite increased awareness of mental health problems, stigma persists. Little research has examined potential health and wellbeing outcomes associated with stigma. The aim of this study was to investigate relationships between mental health stigma, metabolic and cardiovascular biomarkers, as well as wellbeing and quality of life among people with no mental disorder, common mental disorders and severe mental illness. Data were taken from adults aged 16 + years participating in the Health Survey for England in 2014 (N = 5491). Mental health stigma was measured using the 12-item Community Attitudes towards the Mentally Ill (CAMI) scale, intended to measure attitudes around prejudice and exclusion, and tolerance and support for community care. Individuals were divided into six groups based on their mental health (no mental disorder, common mental disorder, severe mental illness) and whether they exhibited more (≤25th percentile) or less (>25th percentile) stigmatising attitudes. Metabolic and cardiovascular biomarker outcomes included systolic and diastolic blood pressure; total cholesterol; high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol; glycated haemoglobin, body mass index (BMI), waist-hip ratio and resting pulse rate. Biomarkers were analysed individually and as an allostatic load score. Wellbeing was measured using Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) and quality of life via Euro-QoL-5D (EQ-5D). Linear regression models were calculated adjusted for confounders. Compared to individuals with less stigmatising attitudes, results suggested that those with more negative attitudes exhibited poorer wellbeing and quality of life across all mental disorder/stigma groups, including those with no mental disorder (WEMWBS (range 14-70): b = -1.384, 95% CI: -2.107 to -0.661). People with severe mental illness generally had unhealthier biomarker profiles and allostatic load scores, but results were inconsistent for any additional influence of mental health stigma. Reducing stigma may be beneficial for population wellbeing, but further research is needed to clarify whether stigma contributes to adverse biomarkers amongst people with mental illness.

Project description:BackgroundSimilar to the general public, mental health professionals sometimes also have negative attitudes towards individuals with mental illness; which could ultimately affect the quality of care received by the patients. This study aims to explore attitudes to mental illness among mental health professionals in Singapore; make comparisons with the general population; and investigate the significant correlates.MethodsA cross-sectional design was used. Eligible participants were recruited from the Institute of Mental Health, Singapore. Attitudes to mental illness among the mental health professionals were measured using an adapted 26-item Attitudes to Mental Illness questionnaire (AMI). An earlier study amongst the general population in Singapore had used the same tool; however, factor analysis suggested a 20-item, 4-factor structure (AMI-SG) was the best fit. This 4-factor structure was applied among the current sample of mental health professionals to allow comparisons between the professionals and the general population. Data were collected through an online survey tool 'Questionpro' from February to April 2016, and 379 participants were included in the current analysis. Attitudes to mental illness among these professionals were compared to those of the general population, which were captured as part of a national study conducted from March 2014 to April 2015.ResultsThe 20-item, 4-factor structure AMI-SG derived from the general population was applicable among the mental health professionals in Singapore. Compared to the general population, mental health professionals had significantly more positive attitudes to mental illness; however their scores on 'social distancing' did not differ from the general population. Indian ethnicity was negatively associated with 'social distancing' and 'social restrictiveness' among the professionals; while higher education was negatively related to 'prejudice and misconception'. Compared to nurses, doctors showed significantly more positive attitudes on 'social restrictiveness' and 'prejudice and misconception'. Having family or close friends diagnosed with mental illness was negatively associated with 'social distancing' among the professionals.ConclusionThe AMI-SG is an effective tool to measure attitudes to mental illness among mental health professionals in Singapore. Although the professionals had significantly more positive attitudes to mental illness than the general public in Singapore, their attitudes on 'social distancing' resembled closely that of the general public. Professionals tended to have more negative attitudes if they were nurses, less educated, and of Chinese ethnicity. More studies are needed to explore the underlying reasons for the differences and to generalize these findings among mental health professionals elsewhere.

Dataset Information

Associative stigma among mental health professionals in Singapore: a cross-sectional study.

Objectives

Design

Participants

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Associative stigma among mental health professionals in Singapore: a cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets