Dataset Information

Factors associated with non-initiation of mental healthcare after detection of poor mental health at a scheduled health check: a cohort study.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Poor mental health is an important public health concern, but mental health problems are often under-recognised. Providing feedback to general practitioners (GPs) on their patients' mental health status may improve the identification of cases in need of mental healthcare. OBJECTIVES:To investigate the extent of initiation of mental healthcare after identification of poor mental health and to identify factors associated with non-initiation. DESIGN:Prospective cohort study with 1-year follow-up. SETTING:In a population-based health preventive programme, Check Your Health, we conducted a combined mental and physical health check in Randers Municipality, Denmark, in 2012-2015 in collaboration with local GPs. PARTICIPANTS:Participants were 350 individuals aged 30-49 years old with screen-detected poor mental health who had not received mental healthcare within the past year. The cohort was derived from 14 167 randomly selected individuals of whom 52% (n=7348) participated. Mental health was assessed by the mental component summary score of the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey. OUTCOME:The outcome was initiation of mental healthcare. Mental healthcare included psychometric testing by GP, talk therapy by GP, contact with a psychologist, contact with a psychiatrist and psychotropic medication. RESULTS:Within 1 year, 22% (95% CI 18 to 27) of individuals with screen-detected poor mental health initiated mental healthcare. Among individuals who initiated mental healthcare within follow-up, one in six had visited their GP once or less in the preceding year. Male sex (OR: 0.49 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.86)) and less impaired mental health (OR: 0.93 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.98)) were associated with non-initiation of mental healthcare. We found no overall association between socioeconomic factors and initiating mental healthcare. CONCLUSION:Systematic provision of mental health test results to GPs may improve the identification of cases in need of mental healthcare, but does not translate into initiation of mental healthcare. Further research should focus on methods to improve initiation of mental healthcare, especially among men. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02028195.

SUBMITTER: Geyti C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7569988 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Factors associated with non-initiation of mental healthcare after detection of poor mental health at a scheduled health check: a cohort study.

Geyti Christine C Christensen Kaj Sparle KS Dalsgaard Else-Marie EM Bech Bodil Hammer BH Gunn Jane J Maindal Helle Terkildsen HT Sandbaek Annelli A

BMJ open 20201016 10

<h4>Introduction</h4>Poor mental health is an important public health concern, but mental health problems are often under-recognised. Providing feedback to general practitioners (GPs) on their patients' mental health status may improve the identification of cases in need of mental healthcare.<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate the extent of initiation of mental healthcare after identification of poor mental health and to identify factors associated with non-initiation.<h4>Design</h4>Prospective co ...[more]

PMID: 33067280

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mental health (MH) problems have considerable personal and societal implications. Systematic MH screening may raise general practitioners' (GP) awareness of the current need of treatment in their listed patients. The focus of MH screening has so far been on increasing diagnostic rates and treatment of mental disorders, whereas cessation of MH treatment after normal test results has rarely been studied. This study aims to examine the mental healthcare trajectories after MH screening combined with feedback on both positive and negative screening results to the GP. METHODS:This prospective cohort study is based on data from 11,714 randomly selected individuals aged 30-49?years, who were invited to a preventive health check in Denmark during 2012-2015. A total of 5970 (51%) were included. MH status was assessed using the SF-12 Health Survey Mental Component Summary score, and scores were categorised into poor, moderate, and good MH. 'Mental healthcare' within 1 year of follow-up covered the following MH support: psychometric testing by GP, talk therapy by GP, contact to psychologist, contact to psychiatrist, and psychotropic medication. RESULTS:MH was found to be poor in 9%, moderate in 25%, and good in 66% of participants. After 1 year, mental healthcare was initiated in 29% of the participants with poor MH who did not receive mental healthcare at baseline, and mental healthcare was ceased in 44% of the participants with good MH who received mental healthcare at baseline. Odds ratio (OR) for initiation of mental healthcare was associated with worse MH screening status: poor MH: OR 7.1 (5.4-9.4), moderate MH: OR 2.4 (1.9-3.1), compared to those with good MH. OR for cessation of mental healthcare was associated with better MH screening status: good MH: OR 1.6 (1.1-2.6), moderate MH: OR 1.6 (1.0-2.4), compared to those with poor MH. Initiation and cessation of mental healthcare appeared to be time-related to the MH screening. CONCLUSIONS:MH screening combined with feedback on both positive and negative screening results to the GP may contribute to relevant initiation and cessation of mental healthcare. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Registration of the Check Your Health-trial: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02028195 ), 7 March 2014.

Project description:BACKGROUND:A healthy and productive health workforce is central to a well-functioning health system. However, health workers are at high risk of poor psychological wellbeing due to their particularly strenuous work demands. While mental health of health workers is a well-researched issue in high-income countries, research from low- and lower-middle-income countries (LLMIC) has begun to emerge only recently. The review aims to synthesize this body of research, specifically to assess the prevalence of mental health issues among health workers in LLMIC, to identify factors associated with good or poor mental health, and to highlight gaps in knowledge. METHODS:We will perform a systematic search of the published English and French language literature (from inception onwards) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. Eligible for inclusion are observational studies (e.g., cross-sectional, case-control, or cohort) and control arms of randomized controlled trials reporting investigations on the nature, prevalence, and factors associated with mental health or psychological wellbeing among formally trained health professionals and health associate professionals delivering health services in formal healthcare facilities in LLMIC. The primary outcomes will be burnout, depression, and general psychological wellbeing. Secondary outcomes include other specific mental health diagnoses, as well as general psychological stress, distress and/or trauma if work-related and explicitly framed as a mental health issue. Two authors will independently examine the studies against the eligibility criteria in the stages of title, abstract, and full-text study selection, as well as assess the risk of bias in included studies using standard checklists depending on study design. Disagreements will be resolved in discussion with the third author. Data will be extracted from included studies using a predefined and piloted coding framework. Given the anticipated heterogeneity of studies, we do not expect to be able to conduct meta-analysis and plan to summarize the extracted data in narrative form. The framework method will be used to organize narrative data by subthemes and explore patterns. DISCUSSION:In assessing the prevalence of mental health issues among healthcare professionals in LLMIC and identifying factors associated with positive or poor mental health, the review aims to synthesize all possible available information for policy makers and health system managers on a potentially highly important but not yet much-discussed issue and to highlight gaps in currently available knowledge. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (registration number CRD42019140036).

Project description:BackgroundMental health service providers are increasingly interested in patient perspectives. We examined rates and predictors of patient-reported satisfaction and perceived helpfulness in a cross-national general population survey of adults with 12-month DSM-IV disorders who saw a provider for help with their mental health.MethodsData were obtained from epidemiological surveys in the World Mental Health Survey Initiative. Respondents were asked about satisfaction with treatments received from up to 11 different types of providers (very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied) and helpfulness of the provider (a lot, some, a little, not at all). We modelled predictors of satisfaction and helpfulness using a dataset of patient-provider observations (n = 5,248).ResultsMost treatment was provided by general medical providers (37.4%), psychiatrists (18.4%) and psychologists (12.7%). Most patients were satisfied or very satisfied (65.9-87.5%, across provider) and helped a lot or some (64.4-90.3%). Spiritual advisors and healers were most often rated satisfactory and helpful. Social workers in human services settings were rated lowest on both dimensions. Patients also reported comparatively low satisfaction with general medical doctors and psychiatrists/psychologists and found general medical doctors less helpful than other providers. Men and students reported lower levels of satisfaction than women and nonstudents. Respondents with high education reported higher satisfaction and helpfulness than those with lower education. Type of mental disorder was unrelated to satisfaction but in some cases (depression, bipolar spectrum disorder, social phobia) was associated with low perceived helpfulness. Insurance was unrelated to either satisfaction or perceived helpfulness but in some cases was associated with elevated perceived helpfulness for a given level of satisfaction.ConclusionsSatisfaction with and perceived helpfulness of treatment varied as a function of type of provider, service setting, mental status, and socio-demographic variables. Invariably, caution is needed in combining data from multiple countries where there are cultural and service delivery variations. Even so, our findings underscore the utility of patient perspectives in treatment evaluation and may also be relevant in efforts to match patients to treatments.

Project description:IntroductionA 2015 Institute Of Medicine statement "Transforming Health Care Scheduling and Access: Getting to Now", has increased concerns regarding patient wait times. Although waiting times have been widely studied, little attention has been paid to the role of patient arrival times as a component of this phenomenon. To this end, we investigated patterns of patient arrival at scheduled ambulatory heart failure (HF) clinic appointments and studied its predictors. We hypothesized that patients are more likely to arrive later than scheduled, with progressively later arrivals later in the day.Methods and resultsUsing a business intelligence database we identified 6,194 unique patients that visited the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus HF clinic between January, 2015 and January, 2017. This clinic served both as a tertiary referral center and a community HF clinic. Transplant and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) visits were excluded. Punctuality was defined as the difference between 'actual' and 'scheduled' check-in times, whereby negative values (i.e., early punctuality) were patients who checked-in early. Contrary to our hypothesis, we found that patients checked-in late only a minority of the time (38% of visits). Additionally, examining punctuality by appointment hour slot we found that patients scheduled after 8AM had progressively earlier check-in times as the day progressed (P < .001 for trend). In both a Random Forest-Regression framework and linear regression models the most important risk-adjusted predictors of early punctuality were: later in the day appointment hour slot, patient having previously been to the hospital, age in the early 70s, and white race.ConclusionsPatients attending a mixed population ambulatory HF clinic check-in earlier than scheduled times, with progressive discrepant intervals throughout the day. This finding may have significant implications for provider utilization and resource planning in order to maximize clinic efficiency. The impact of elective early arrival on patient's perceived wait times requires further study.

Project description:India is revising its mental health legislation with the Indian Mental Healthcare Act 2017 (IMHA). When implemented, this legislation will apply to over 1.25 billion people. In 2005, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a Resource Book (WHO-RB) on mental health, human rights and legislation, including a checklist of 175 specific items to be addressed in mental health legislation or policy in individual countries. Even following the publication of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) (2006), the WHO-RB remains the most comprehensive checklist for mental health legislation available, rooted in UN and WHO documents and providing the most systematic, detailed framework for human rights analysis of mental health legislation. We sought to determine the extent to which the IMHA will bring Indian legislation in line with the WHO-RB.The IMHA and other relevant pieces of Indian legislation are compared to each of the items in the WHO-RB. We classify each item in a binary manner, as either concordant or not, and provide more nuanced detail in the text.The IMHA addresses 96/175 (55.4%) of the WHO-RB standards examined. When other relevant Indian legislation is taken into account, 118/175 (68.0%) of the standards are addressed in Indian law. Important areas of low concordance include the rights of families and carers, competence and guardianship, non-protesting patients and involuntary community treatment. The important legal constructs of advance directives, supported decision-making and nominated representatives are articulated in the Indian legislation and explored in this paper.In theory, the IMHA is a highly progressive piece of legislation, especially when compared to legislation in other jurisdictions subject to similar analysis. Along with the Indian Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016, it will bring Indian law closely in line with the WHO-RB. Vague, opaque language is however, used in certain contentious areas; this may represent arrangement-focused rather than realisation-focused legislation, and lead to inadvertent limitation of certain rights. Finally, the WHO-RB checklist is an extremely useful tool for this kind of analysis; we recommend it is updated to reflect the CRPD and other relevant developments.

Dataset Information

Factors associated with non-initiation of mental healthcare after detection of poor mental health at a scheduled health check: a cohort study.

Publications

Factors associated with non-initiation of mental healthcare after detection of poor mental health at a scheduled health check: a cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets