Dataset Information

Efficacy of an Intervention to Reduce Stigma Beliefs and Attitudes among Primary Care and Mental Health Professionals: Two Cluster Randomised-Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT: Although it may seem paradoxical, primary care and mental health professionals develop prejudices and discriminatory attitudes towards people with mental health problems in a very similar way to the rest of the population. The main objective of this project was to design, implement and evaluate two awareness-raising interventions respectively tailored to reduce stigmatising beliefs and attitudes towards persons with a mental health diagnosis among primary care (PC) and mental health (MH) professionals. These interventions were developed by Obertament, the Catalan alliance against stigma and discrimination in mental health. Activists from this organisation with lived experience of mental health diagnosis carried out awareness-raising interventions in PC and MH health centres. The Targeted, Local, Credible, Continuous Contact (TLC3) methodology was adapted to the Catalan healthcare context. The efficacy of these interventions was evaluated using two prospective double-blind cluster-randomised-controlled trials. Stigmatizing beliefs and behaviours were measured with the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers in PC centres and with the Beliefs and Attitudes towards Mental Health Service users' rights in MH centres. Reductions in both PC and MH professionals' stigmatising beliefs and attitudes were found in the 1-month follow-up, although a 'rebound effect' at the 3-month follow up was detected. This emphasizes the importance of the continuity of the presence of anti-stigma activities and messages. Attrition rates were high, which can hamper the reliability of the results. Further follow-up studies should enquiry effects of long-term interventions aimed at reducing stigmatising beliefs and attitudes among primary care and mental health professionals using assessment systems that include the measurement of knowledge acquired and actual behavioural change.

SUBMITTER: Eiroa-Orosa FJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7908111 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy of an Intervention to Reduce Stigma Beliefs and Attitudes among Primary Care and Mental Health Professionals: Two Cluster Randomised-Controlled Trials.

Eiroa-Orosa Francisco José FJ Lomascolo María M Tosas-Fernández Anaïs A

International journal of environmental research and public health 20210129 3

Although it may seem paradoxical, primary care and mental health professionals develop prejudices and discriminatory attitudes towards people with mental health problems in a very similar way to the rest of the population. The main objective of this project was to design, implement and evaluate two awareness-raising interventions respectively tailored to reduce stigmatising beliefs and attitudes towards persons with a mental health diagnosis among primary care (PC) and mental health (MH) profess ...[more]

PMID: 33572955

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare attitudes of mental health (MH) professionals towards trials of methylenedioxymethamphetamine-assisted psychotherapy (MDMA-AP), with a neutrally labelled pharmacotherapy trial.DesignA randomised controlled vignette study design, with experimenters blinded to group condition.SettingParticipants were recruited online via professional societies.ParticipantsPsychiatrists, psychologists and MH researchers from across Australia.InterventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to read a vignette about a trial of either MDMA-AP or a neutrally labelled pharmacotherapy.OutcomesComparison of the difference in four attitudes towards MDMA-AP and control: How likely they were to (1) recommend participating, or (2) object to participating in the trial; (3) their predicted efficacy; and (4) concerns about the safety of the trial.ResultsThere were no overall differences between professional's attitudes towards MDMA-AP (n=51) and the control pharmacotherapy (n=43) trial vignettes. Psychiatrists were less likely to recommend participation in the MDMA-AP than the control trial (d=0.72, p=0.02), but did not differ in other attitudes. Psychologists and researchers did not differ in any attitudes. The correlation between professional experience and both: (1) concern about, and (2) strength of objection to, the trial, was higher for MDMA-AP, than control (d=0.60, p=0.01 and d=0.40, p=0.03, respectively).ConclusionsPsychiatrists, but not psychologists or researchers showed more hesitancy in recommending trials of MDMA-AP versus an unknown pharmacotherapy. Experienced MH professionals were more likely to have negative views about MDMA-AP trials than less experienced MH professionals. This may reflect the experience of prior unfulfilled pharmacotherapy innovation or exuberance associated with fewer years of practice. Research into, and implementation of, MDMA-AP may face barriers with certain MH professionals, which will need be addressed if MDMA-AP continues to show promise as an efficacious treatment.Trial registration numberThe study design was registered with the ANZCTR (ACTRN12620001068954).

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study is to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of the universal mental health literacy intervention "EspaiJove.net" in increasing mental health knowledge, help seeking and reducing stigma attitudes in the adolescent population. We also examine whether these effects depend on the intervention intensity. METHODS: A clustered school-based randomised controlled trial (cRCT) design.Subjects1,298 secondary pupils aged 13 and 14 were recruited from 18 schools in Barcelona (Spain) between September 2016 and January 2018.InterventionThree programmes were assessed: 1) Sensitivity Programme (SP; 1 h); 2) Mental Health Literacy (MHL; 6 h); 3) MHL plus a first-person Stigma Reduction Programme (MHL + SR; 7 h); 4) Control group (CG): waiting list.Outcome measures1) MHL: EspaiJove.net EMHL Test (First part and Second Part); 2) Stigma: RIBS and CAMI; 3) Help-seeking and use of treatment: GHSQ.AnalysisThe data was collected at baseline, post-intervention and 6 and 12 months later. An intention-to-treat analysis and imputation method was used to analyse the missing data. Intervention effects were analysed using multilevel modelling.ResultsOne thousand thirty-two students were included (SP = 225; MHL = 261; MHL + SR = 295 and CG = 251). The MHL and MHL + SR interventions showed short- and long-term an increase in knowledge compared to SP and CG, but no significant change post-intervention or over time (First part p = 0.52 and Second part p = 0.62) between intervention groups and CG. No significant changes were found in stigma scores post-intervention or over time (CAMI p = 0.61 and RIBS p = 0.98) or in help-seeking scores (parent p = 0.69; teacher p = 0.23 and healthcare professional p = 0.75). The MHL + SR intervention was the best valued and recommended (p < 0.005).ConclusionsThe three interventions of the EspaiJove.net programme (SP, MHL and MHL + SR) seem not to be effective in terms MHL, Stigma and help-seeking behaviours. The contact with a person who has experimented mental illness first-hand did not reduce stigma attitudes. Further research should deal with the heterogeneity of MHL interventions (concept, duration and measures) and identify which components of stigma interventions are effective.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03215654 (registration date 12 July 2017).

Project description:IntroductionHIV status awareness is important for household contacts of patients with tuberculosis (TB). Home HIV testing during TB contact investigation increases HIV status awareness. Social interactions during home visits may influence perceived stigma and uptake of HIV testing. We designed an intervention to normalise and facilitate uptake of home HIV testing with five components: guided selection of first tester; prosocial invitation scripts; opt-out framing; optional sharing of decisions to test; and masking of decisions not to test.Methods and analysisWe will evaluate the intervention effect in a household-randomised controlled trial. The primary aim is to assess whether contacts offered HIV testing using the norming strategy will accept HIV testing more often than those offered testing using standard strategies. Approximately 198 households will be enrolled through three public health facilities in Kampala, Uganda. Households will be randomised to receive the norming or standard strategy and visited by a community health worker (CHW) assigned to that strategy. Eligible contacts ≥15 years will be offered optional, free, home HIV testing. The primary outcome, proportion of contacts accepting HIV testing, will be assessed by CHWs and analysed using an intention-to-treat approach. Secondary outcomes will be changes in perceived HIV stigma, changes in perceived TB stigma, effects of perceived HIV stigma on HIV test uptake, effects of perceived TB stigma on HIV test uptake and proportions of first-invited contacts who accept HIV testing. Results will inform new, scalable strategies for delivering HIV testing.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the Yale Human Investigation Committee (2000024852), Makerere University School of Public Health Institutional Review Board (661) and Uganda National Council on Science and Technology (HS2567). All participants, including patients and their household contacts, will provide verbal informed consent. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated to national stakeholders, including policy-makers and representatives of affected communities.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05124665.

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.

Dataset Information

Efficacy of an Intervention to Reduce Stigma Beliefs and Attitudes among Primary Care and Mental Health Professionals: Two Cluster Randomised-Controlled Trials.

Publications

Efficacy of an Intervention to Reduce Stigma Beliefs and Attitudes among Primary Care and Mental Health Professionals: Two Cluster Randomised-Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets