Suchergebnisse

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess sociodemographic factors and factors connected with treatment of mental illness and to decide whether they can influence the level of self-stigma. Method: Sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, family status, level of employment, level of education) and characteristics related to illness and treatment (diagnosis, length of treatment, adherence to treatment) were gathered in a group of patients in stable mental condition, without acute symptoms of mental illness. Self-stigma was measured using the Self-stigma of Mental Illness Scale – short form (SSMIS-SF). Results: The sample included 197 patients: 99 patients in group 1 (G1) with psychosis and 98 in group 2 (G2) with anxious and affective disorders. The average age was 44.15 ± 12.91 years, the length of illness was 11.67 ± 9.21 years and 48% of patients were men. The total average SSMIS-SF score was 61.54 ± 23.34. We found no statistically significant difference in the total level of self-stigmatisation between these groups ( t(197) = 0.77; p = .441). The level of self-stigmatisation (total score of SSMIS-SF) in patients in G1 (psychosis) increased with the length of illness r(99) = .253; p = .011. Employment status seems to correlate with the level of self-stigmatisation ( F(3, 184) = 5.27; p = .002). Patients unemployed and on disability pension had higher levels of self-stigmatisation than patients working full-time. Patients who took medication regularly (full medical adherence) had lower scores of SSMIS-SF total scores in comparison with patients with lower compliance ( t(195) = 3.476; p = .001; Cohen's d = .25). Conclusion: According to our results, with regard to the factors that were followed, self-stigmatisation correlates with the presence of employment (social inclusion), duration of illness in patients with psychosis and treatment adherence. We did not find a statistically significant influence of age, gender, marital status or clinical diagnosis on the level of self-stigma.

Background: Despite the progress over recent decades in developing community mental health services internationally, many people still receive treatment and care in institutional settings. Those most likely to reside longest in these facilities have the most complex mental health problems and are at most risk of potential abuses of care and exploitation. This study aimed to develop an international, standardised toolkit to assess the quality of care in longer term hospital and community based mental health units, including the degree to which human rights, social inclusion and autonomy are promoted. Method: The domains of care included in the toolkit were identified from a systematic literature review, international expert Delphi exercise, and review of care standards in ten European countries. The draft toolkit comprised 154 questions for unit managers. Inter-rater reliability was tested in 202 units across ten countries at different stages of deinstitutionalisation and development of community mental health services. Exploratory factor analysis was used to corroborate the allocation of items to domains. Feedback from those using the toolkit was collected about its usefulness and ease of completion. Results: The toolkit had excellent inter-rater reliability and few items with narrow spread of response. Unit managers found the content highly relevant and were able to complete it in around 90 minutes. Minimal refinement was required and the final version comprised 145 questions assessing seven domains of care. Conclusions: Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative evidence directed the development of a robust and comprehensive international quality assessment toolkit for units in highly variable socioeconomic and political contexts.

Background: Despite the progress over recent decades in developing community mental health services internationally, many people still receive treatment and care in institutional settings. Those most likely to reside longest in these facilities have the most complex mental health problems and are at most risk of potential abuses of care and exploitation. This study aimed to develop an international, standardised toolkit to assess the quality of care in longer term hospital and community based mental health units, including the degree to which human rights, social inclusion and autonomy are promoted. Method: The domains of care included in the toolkit were identified from a systematic literature review, international expert Delphi exercise, and review of care standards in ten European countries. The draft toolkit comprised 154 questions for unit managers. Inter-rater reliability was tested in 202 units across ten countries at different stages of deinstitutionalisation and development of community mental health services. Exploratory factor analysis was used to corroborate the allocation of items to domains. Feedback from those using the toolkit was collected about its usefulness and ease of completion. Results: The toolkit had excellent inter-rater reliability and few items with narrow spread of response. Unit managers found the content highly relevant and were able to complete it in around 90 minutes. Minimal refinement was required and the final version comprised 145 questions assessing seven domains of care. Conclusions: Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative evidence directed the development of a robust and comprehensive international quality assessment toolkit for units in highly variable socioeconomic and political contexts.