Dataset Information

Attitudes towards psychopharmacology and psychotherapy in psychiatric patients with and without migration background.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sociodemographic factors, attitude towards treatment and acculturation may be important factors influencing the decision of immigrants to seek and maintain psychiatric treatment. A better understanding of these factors may significantly improve treatment adherence and outcome in these patients. Therefore, we investigated factors associated the attitude towards psychotherapy and medication in a sample of psychiatric outpatients with and without migration background.

Methods

N?=?381 patients in a psychiatric outpatient unit offering specialized treatment for migrants were included in this study. Attitude towards psychotherapy was assessed using the Questionnaire on Attitudes Toward Psychotherapeutic Treatment, attitude towards medication with the Drug Attitude Inventory-10. Acculturation, symptom load and sociodemographic variables were assessed in a general questionnaire. Statistical analyses included analyses of covariance and hierarchical regression.

Results

Patients of Turkish and Eastern European origin reported a significantly more positive attitude towards medication than patients without migration background. When controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables, we did not observe any significant differences in attitude towards psychotherapy. Acculturation neither influenced the attitude towards psychotherapy nor towards medication.

Conclusion

Our study indicates that sociodemographic and clinical factors may be more relevant for patients´ attitudes towards treatment than acculturation. Considering these factors in psychiatric treatment of patients with migration background may improve treatment outcome and adherence.

SUBMITTER: Brandl EJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7164188 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Attitudes towards psychopharmacology and psychotherapy in psychiatric patients with and without migration background.

Brandl Eva J EJ Dietrich Nora N Mell Nicoleta N Winkler Johanna G JG Gutwinski Stefan S Bretz H Joachim HJ Schouler-Ocak Meryam M

BMC psychiatry 20200417 1

<h4>Background</h4>Sociodemographic factors, attitude towards treatment and acculturation may be important factors influencing the decision of immigrants to seek and maintain psychiatric treatment. A better understanding of these factors may significantly improve treatment adherence and outcome in these patients. Therefore, we investigated factors associated the attitude towards psychotherapy and medication in a sample of psychiatric outpatients with and without migration background.<h4>Methods< ...[more]

PMID: 32303265

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has become a global health catastrophe. By far, there has been no specific antiviral treatment for COVID-19. Developing a vaccine against COVID-19 appeared to be the most cost-effective strategy to stop the repeated outbreak. This study aimed to investigate the attitudes of psychiatric patients with regards to COVID-19 vaccination and potential factors that might influence their decision-making process.MethodsPsychiatric patients participated in this cross-sectional survey in China. Family caregivers, usually a guardian or next of kin completed the questionnaire when the patient is unable to consent. Data was collected via an online self-administered questionnaire. This questionnaire focused on four main attributes: (1) sociology-demographic characteristics, such as age and sex; (2) questions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as perceived risk of COVID-19; (3) Flu vaccination history; and (4) attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination and affected factors, such as preferred vaccine type and vaccination site. The associated factors that influenced vaccination acceptance were analyzed by Chi-square analysis and binary logistic regression.ResultsIn total, 416 individuals were recruited, from which 408: 229 patients and 179 family caregivers completed the online survey (response rate: 98.1%). 78.7% of the participants (178 patients and 143 family caregivers) said they intended to receive vaccination once the COVID-19 vaccine became available on the market. Our results showed that participants would have a greater likelihood of joining the COVID-9 immunization programme if the people they knew (community residents or their friends and relatives) presented with high vaccine coverage (OR = 0.24; 95% CI:0.09-0.59). If the pandemic returns, participants were also more likely to accept vaccination (OR = 0.21; 95% CI:0.07-0.62). Moreover, those who believed that the vaccination was an important way to control the COVID-19 pandemic also showed a tendency to receive vaccination (OR = 0.21; 95% CI:0.11-0.40). For those who did not intend to get vaccinated either for themselves or their psychiatric family member, the safety of vaccine was their main concern (71.3%).ConclusionsThis study showed a high acceptance rate for COVID-19 vaccination amongst psychiatric patients, while worries about the safety of vaccine led to refusal towards vaccination. To increase vaccination uptake amongst this vulnerable group, the public health messaging should include updated vaccination coverage in local communities, and the number of newly COVID-19 infected cases. Specific information about vaccine safety concerning psychiatric patients; as well as the importance of vaccination in controlling the pandemic should be explained in detail.

Project description:BackgroundMigrants seem to be underrepresented in palliative care in Germany. Access barriers and challenges in care remain unclear. We aimed to provide a comprehensive insight into palliative care for migrants, using expert interviews.MethodsInterviews with experts on palliative and general health care for migrants were audiotaped and transcribed. Data analysis followed a qualitative content analysis method for expert interviews proposed by Meuser and Nagel.ResultsIn total, 13 experts from various fields (palliative and hospice care, other care, research and training) were interviewed. Experts identified access barriers on the health care system and the patient level as well as the sociopolitical level. Services don't address migrants, who may use parallel structures. Patients may distrust the health care system, be oriented towards their home country and expect the family to care for them. In care, poor adaptation and inflexibility of health care services regarding needs of migrant patients because of scarce resources, patients' preferences which may contradict professionals' values, and communication both on the verbal and nonverbal level were identified as the main challenges. Conflicts between patients, families and professionals are at risk to be interpreted exclusively as cultural conflicts. Palliative care providers should use skilled interpreters instead of family interpreters or unskilled staff members, and focus on training cultural competence. Furthermore, intercultural teams could enhance palliative care provision for migrants.ConclusionsThough needs and wishes of migrant patients are often found to be similar to those of non-migrant patients, there are migration-specific aspects that can influence care provision at the end of life. Migration should be regarded as a biographical experience that has a severe and ongoing impact on the life of an individual and their family. Language barriers have to be considered, especially regarding patients' right to informed decision making. The reimbursement of interpreters in health care remains an open question.

Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy. Yet people are often reluctant to trust automated systems, and some patient populations may be particularly distrusting. We sought to determine how diverse patient populations feel about the use of AI diagnostic tools, and whether framing and informing the choice affects uptake. To construct and pretest our materials, we conducted structured interviews with a diverse set of actual patients. We then conducted a pre-registered (osf.io/9y26x), randomized, blinded survey experiment in factorial design. A survey firm provided n = 2675 responses, oversampling minoritized populations. Clinical vignettes were randomly manipulated in eight variables with two levels each: disease severity (leukemia versus sleep apnea), whether AI is proven more accurate than human specialists, whether the AI clinic is personalized to the patient through listening and/or tailoring, whether the AI clinic avoids racial and/or financial biases, whether the Primary Care Physician (PCP) promises to explain and incorporate the advice, and whether the PCP nudges the patient towards AI as the established, recommended, and easy choice. Our main outcome measure was selection of AI clinic or human physician specialist clinic (binary, "AI uptake"). We found that with weighting representative to the U.S. population, respondents were almost evenly split (52.9% chose human doctor and 47.1% chose AI clinic). In unweighted experimental contrasts of respondents who met pre-registered criteria for engagement, a PCP's explanation that AI has proven superior accuracy increased uptake (OR = 1.48, CI 1.24-1.77, p < .001), as did a PCP's nudge towards AI as the established choice (OR = 1.25, CI: 1.05-1.50, p = .013), as did reassurance that the AI clinic had trained counselors to listen to the patient's unique perspectives (OR = 1.27, CI: 1.07-1.52, p = .008). Disease severity (leukemia versus sleep apnea) and other manipulations did not affect AI uptake significantly. Compared to White respondents, Black respondents selected AI less often (OR = .73, CI: .55-.96, p = .023) and Native Americans selected it more often (OR: 1.37, CI: 1.01-1.87, p = .041). Older respondents were less likely to choose AI (OR: .99, CI: .987-.999, p = .03), as were those who identified as politically conservative (OR: .65, CI: .52-.81, p < .001) or viewed religion as important (OR: .64, CI: .52-.77, p < .001). For each unit increase in education, the odds are 1.10 greater for selecting an AI provider (OR: 1.10, CI: 1.03-1.18, p = .004). While many patients appear resistant to the use of AI, accuracy information, nudges and a listening patient experience may help increase acceptance. To ensure that the benefits of AI are secured in clinical practice, future research on best methods of physician incorporation and patient decision making is required.

Dataset Information

Attitudes towards psychopharmacology and psychotherapy in psychiatric patients with and without migration background.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Attitudes towards psychopharmacology and psychotherapy in psychiatric patients with and without migration background.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets