<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/rss.css" type="text/css"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
    xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:extra="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
    xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/feeds/latestarticles/journal?quantity=&amp;format=rss&amp;version=">
        <title>International Journal of Mental Health Systems - Latest Articles</title>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com</link>
        <description>The latest research articles published by International Journal of Mental Health Systems</description>
        <dc:date>2012-04-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/3" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/2" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/1" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/31" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/30" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/29" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/28" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/27" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/26" />
                                <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/24" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
                 <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/3">
        <title>How Norwegian casualty clinics handle contacts related to mental illness: A prospective observational study</title>
        <description>Background:
Low-threshold and out-of-hours services play an important role in the emergency care for people with mental illness. In Norway casualty clinic doctors are responsible for a substantial share of acute referrals to psychiatric wards. This study&apos;s aim was to identify patients contacting the casualty clinic for mental illness related problems and study interventions anddiagnoses.
Methods:
At four Norwegian casualty clinics information on treatment, diagnoses and referral were retrieved from the medical records of patients judged by doctors to present problems related to mental illness including substance misuse. Also, routine information and relation to mental illness were gathered for all consecutive contacts to the casualty clinics.
Results:
In the initial contacts to the casualty clinics (n = 28527) a relation to mental illness was reported in 2.5% of contacts, whereas the corresponding proportion in the doctor registered consultations, home-visits and emergency call-outs (n = 9487) was 9.3%. Compared to othercontacts, mental illness contacts were relatively more urgent and more frequent during nighttime. Common interventions were advice from a nurse, laboratory testing, prescriptions and minor surgical treatment. A third of patients in contact with doctors were referred to inpatient treatment, mostly non-psychiatric wards. Many patients were not given diagnoses signalling mental problems. When police was involved, they often presented the patient forexamination.
Conclusions:
Most mental illness related contacts are managed in Norwegian casualty clinics without referral to in-patient care. The patients benefit from a wide range of interventions, of which psychiatric admission is only one.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/3</link>
                <dc:creator>Ingrid Johansen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Tone Morken</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Steinar Hunskaar</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2012, null:3</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-04-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-6-3</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-6-3-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>3</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-04-20T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/2">
        <title>Reducing the use of seclusion for mental disorder in a prison: implementing a high support unit in a prison using participant action research</title>
        <description>Background:
Vulnerable prisoners and mentally disordered offenders who present with risk of harm to self or others were accommodated in Special Observation Cells (SOCs) isolated from others for considerable periods of time. This practice has been criticised by the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture. The objective of this initiative was to reduce the use of seclusion within the prison and to improve the care of vulnerable and mentally ill prisoners within the prison.
Results:
The prison studied is a committal centre for sentenced prisoners with an official bed capacity of 630. The forensic mental health in-reach team, in co-operation with the prison health service followed the &apos;spiral&apos; of planning, action and fact finding about the results of the action. In December 2010 a 10 bed High Support Unit (HSU) was established within the prison. During the first year, 96 prisoners were admitted. A third (35%) reported psychotic symptoms, 28% were referred due to the immediate risk of self-harm, 17% were accommodated for medical treatments and increased observation, 13% received specialised treatment by the Addiction Psychiatry team, 6% presented with emotional distress. One prisoner was accommodated on the HSU due to the acute risk he posed to others. A major mental illness was diagnosed in 29%, 20% required short-term increased support for crisis intervention and were found not to have a mental illness. A further 10% were deemed to be feigning symptoms of mental illness to seek refuge in the HSU. 7% had personality disorder as their primary diagnosis and 4% had a learning disability. Stratifying risk within the prison population through the provision of the HSU decreased the total episodes of seclusion in the prison by 59% (p &lt; 0.001) in addition to providing a more effective psychiatric in-reach service to the prison. Pathways between the prison and the forensic psychiatric hospital saw no change in activity but improved continuity of care.
Conclusions:
The next step is to further stratify risk by establishing a low support unit to serve as a step-down from the high support unit.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/2</link>
                <dc:creator>Yvette Giblin</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Andy Kelly</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Enda Kelly</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Harry Kennedy</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Damian Mohan</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2012, null:2</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-04-09T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-6-2</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-6-2-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>2</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-04-09T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/1">
        <title>Sitting with others: Mental health self-help groups in northern Ghana</title>
        <description>Background:
Over the past four decades, there has been increasing interest in Self-Help Groups, by mental health services users and caregivers, alike. Research in high-income countries suggests that participation in SHGs is associated with decreased use of inpatient facilities, improved social functioning among service users, and decreased caregiver burden. The formation of SHGs has become an important component of mental health programmes operated by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in low-income countries. However, there has been relatively little research examining the benefits of SHGs in this context.
Methods:
Qualitative research with 18 SHGs, five local non-governmental organisations, community mental health nurses, administrators in Ghana Health Services, and discussions with BasicNeeds staff.
Results:
SHGs have the potential to serve as key components of community mental health programmes in low-resource settings. The strongest evidence concerns how SHGs provide a range of supports, e.g., social, financial, and practical, to service users and caregivers. The groups also appear to foster greater acceptance of service users by their families and by communities at large. Membership in SHGs appears to be associated with more consistent treatment and better outcomes for those who are ill.DiscussionThis study highlights the need for longitudinal qualitative and quantitative evaluations of the effect of SHGs on clinical, social and economic outcomes of service users and their carers.
Conclusions:
The organisation of SHGs appears to be associated with positive outcomes for service users and caregivers. However, there is a need to better understand how SHGs operate and the challenges they face.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/6/1/1</link>
                <dc:creator>Alex Cohen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Shoba Raja</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Chris Underhill</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Peter Yaro</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Adam Dokurugu</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mary De Silva</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Vikram Patel</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2012, null:1</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2012-03-21T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-6-1</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-6-1-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2012-03-21T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>PDF</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/31">
        <title>Shared care in mental illness: A rapid review to inform implementation</title>
        <description>Background:
While integrated primary healthcare for the management of depression has been well researched, appropriate models of primary care for people with severe and persistent psychotic disorders are poorly understood. In 2010 the NSW (Australia) Health Department commissioned a review of the evidence on &quot;shared care&quot; models of ambulatory mental health services. This focussed on critical factors in the implementation of these models in clinical practice, with a view to providing policy direction. The review excluded evidence about dementia, substance use and personality disorders.
Methods:
A rapid review involving a search for systematic reviews on The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). This was followed by a search for papers published since these systematic reviews on Medline and supplemented by limited iterative searching from reference lists.
Results:
Shared care trials report improved mental and physical health outcomes in some clinical settings with improved social function, self management skills, service acceptability and reduced hospitalisation. Other benefits include improved access to specialist care, better engagement with and acceptability of mental health services. Limited economic evaluation shows significant set up costs, reduced patient costs and service savings often realised by other providers. Nevertheless these findings are not evident across all clinical groups. Gains require substantial cross-organisational commitment, carefully designed and consistently delivered interventions, with attention to staff selection, training and supervision. Effective models incorporated linkages across various service levels, clinical monitoring within agreed treatment protocols, improved continuity and comprehensiveness of services.
Conclusions:
&quot;Shared Care&quot; models of mental health service delivery require attention to multiple levels (from organisational to individual clinicians), and complex service re-design. Re-evaluation of the roles of specialist mental health staff is a critical requirement. As expected, no one model of &quot;shared&quot; care fits diverse clinical groups. On the basis of the available evidence, we recommended a local trial that examined the process of implementation of core principles of shared care within primary care and specialist mental health clinical services.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/31</link>
                <dc:creator>Brian Kelly</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>David Perkins</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Jeffrey Fuller</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sharon Parker</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:31</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-21T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-31</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-31-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>31</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-21T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/30">
        <title>Building Capacity in Mental Health Interventions in Low Resource Countries: An Apprenticeship Model for Training Local Providers
</title>
        <description>Background:
Recent global mental health research suggests that mental health interventions can be adapted for use across cultures and in low resource environments. As evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of certain specific interventions begins to accumulate, guidelines are needed for how to train, supervise, and ideally sustain mental health treatment delivery by local providers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).Model and case presentationsThis paper presents an apprenticeship model for lay counselor training and supervision in mental health treatments in LMIC, developed and used by the authors in a range of mental health intervention studies conducted over the last decade in various low-resource settings. We describe the elements of this approach, the underlying logic, and provide examples drawn from our experiences working in 12 countries, with over 100 lay counselors.EvaluationWe review the challenges experienced with this model, and propose some possible solutions.DiscussionWe describe and discuss how this model is consistent with, and draws on, the broader dissemination and implementation (DI) literature.
Conclusion:
In our experience, the apprenticeship model provides a useful framework for implementation of mental health interventions in LMIC. Our goal in this paper is to provide sufficient details about the apprenticeship model to guide other training efforts in mental health interventions.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/30</link>
                <dc:creator>Laura Murray</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Shannon Dorsey</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Paul Bolton</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mark Jordans</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Atif Rahman</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Judith Bass</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Helena Verdeli</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:30</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-18T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-30</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-30-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>30</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-18T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/29">
        <title>Working alliance, interpersonal trust and perceived coercion in mental health review hearings.</title>
        <description>Background:
There is some evidence that when mental health commitment hearings are held in accordance with therapeutic jurisprudence principles they are perceived as less coercive, and more just in their procedures leading to improved treatment adherence and fewer hospital readmissions. This suggests an effect of the hearing on therapeutic relationships. We compared working alliance and interpersonal trust in clinicians and forensic patients, whose continued detentions were reviewed by two different legal review bodies according to their legal category.
Methods:
The hearings were rated as positive or negative by patients and treating psychiatrists using the MacArthur scales for perceived coercion, perceived procedural justice (legal and medical) and for the impact of the hearing. We rated Global assessment of Function (GAF), Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS), Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) and Interpersonal Trust in Physician (ITP) scales six months before the hearing and repeated the WAI and ITP two weeks before and two weeks after the hearing, for 75 of 83 patients in a forensic medium and high secure hospital.
Results:
Psychiatrists agreed with patients regarding the rating of hearings. Patients rated civil hearings (MHTs) more negatively than hearings under insanity legislation (MHRBs). Those reviewed by MHTs had lower scores for WAI and ITP. However, post-hearing WAI and ITP scores were not different from baseline and pre-hearing scores. Using the receiver operating characteristic, baseline WAI and ITP scores predicted how patients would rate the hearings, as did baseline GAF and PANSS scores.
Conclusions:
There was no evidence that positively perceived hearings improved WAI or ITP, but some evidence showed that negatively perceived hearings worsened them. Concentrating on functional recovery and symptom remission remains the best strategy for improved therapeutic relationships.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/29</link>
                <dc:creator>Vidis Donnelly</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Aideen Lynch</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Damian Mohan</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Harry Kennedy</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:29</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-10T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-29</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-29-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>29</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-10T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/28">
        <title>Following up patients with depression after hospital discharge: a mixed methods approach</title>
        <description>Background:
A medication information intervention was delivered to patients with a major depressive episode prior to psychiatric hospital discharge.
Methods:
The objective of this study was to explore how patients evolved after hospital discharge and to identify factors influencing this evolution. Using a quasi-experimental longitudinal design, the quantitative analysis measured clinical (using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the somatic dimension of the Symptom Checklist 90 and recording the number of readmissions) and humanistic (using the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire) outcomes of patients via telephone contacts up to one year following discharge. The qualitative analysis was based on the researcher diary, consisting of reports on the telephone outcome assessment of patients with major depression (n = 99). All reports were analyzed using the thematic framework approach.
Results:
The change in the participants&apos; health status was as diverse as it was at hospital discharge. Participants reported on remissions; changes in mood; relapses; and re-admissions (one third of patients). Quantitative data on group level showed low anxiety, depression and somatic scores over time. Three groups of contributing factors were identified: process, individual and environmental factors. Process factors included self caring process, medical care after discharge, resumption of work and managing daily life. Individual factors were symptom control, medication and personality. Environmental factors were material and social environment. Each of them could ameliorate, deteriorate or be neutral to the patient&apos;s health state. A mix of factors was observed in individual patients.
Conclusions:
After hospital discharge, participants with a major depressive episode evolved in many different ways. Process, individual and environmental factors may influence the participant&apos;s health status following hospital discharge. Each of the factors could be positive, neutral or negative for the patient.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/28</link>
                <dc:creator>Franciska Desplenter</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gert Laekeman</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gippoz Research Group</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Steven Simoens</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:28</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-10T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-28</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-28-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>28</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-10T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/27">
        <title>Identifying barriers to mental health system improvements: An examination of community participation in Assertive Community Treatment programs</title>
        <description>Background:
Integrating the best available evidence into program standards is essential if system-wide improvements in the delivery of community-based mental health services are to be achieved. Since the beginning of the Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) program movement, program standards have included a role for the community. In particular, ACT program standards have sought to ensure that members of the local community are involved in governance and that former clients participate in service delivery as &quot;Peer Support Specialists&quot;. This paper reports on the extent to which ACT program standards related to community participation have been implemented and identifies barriers to full compliance.
Methods:
Qualitative and quantitative data were collected through a telephone survey of ACT Program Coordinators in Ontario, Canada, using a census sample of the existing 66 ACT programs. A thematic approach to content analysis was used to analyze respondents&apos; qualitative comments. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS 16.0 and included means, frequencies, independent t-tests and Pearson Correlations.
Results:
An 85% response rate was achieved. Of the 33 program standards, the two that received the lowest perceived compliance ratings were the two standards directly concerning community participation. Specifically, the standard to have a functioning Community Advisory Body and the standard requiring the inclusion of a Peer Support Specialist. The three major themes that emerged from the survey data with respect to the barriers to fully implementing the Community Advisory Body were: external issues; standard related issues; and, organizational/structural related issues. The three major themes concerning barriers to implementing the Peer Support Specialist role were: human resource related issues; organizational/structural related issues; and, standard related issues.
Conclusions:
The reasons for low compliance of ACT programs with community participation standards are complex and are tied to structural and human resources barriers (both internal and external to the ACT programs) as well as to the requirements of the standards themselves. In order for improvements to the mental health system to be achieved there is a need to identify and address these barriers. Failure to do so will result in less than optimal client, family and economic efficiency outcomes.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/27</link>
                <dc:creator>Patricia Wakefield</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Glen Randall</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>David Richards</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:27</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-11-07T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-27</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-27-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>27</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-11-07T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/26">
        <title>The integration of the treatment for common mental disorders in primary care: experiences of health care providers in the MANAS trial in Goa, India</title>
        <description>Background:
The MANAS trial reported that a Lay Health Counsellor (LHC) led collaborative stepped care intervention (the &quot;MANAS intervention&quot;) for Common Mental Disorders (CMD) was effective in public sector primary care clinics but private sector General Practitioners (GPs) did as well with or without the additional counsellor. This paper aims to describe the experiences of integrating the MANAS intervention in primary care.
Methods:
Qualitative semi-structured interviews with key members (n = 119) of the primary health care teams upon completion of the trial and additional interviews with control arm GPs upon completion of the outcome analyses which revealed non-inferiority of this arm.
Results:
Several components of the MANAS intervention were reported to have been critically important for facilitating integration, notably: screening and the categorization of the severity of CMD; provision of psychosocial treatments and adherence management; and the support of the visiting psychiatrist. Non-adherence was common, often because symptoms had been controlled or because of doubt that health care interventions could address one&apos;s &apos;life difficulties&apos;. Interpersonal therapy was intended to be provided face to face by the LHC; however it could not be delivered for most eligible patients due to the cost implications related to travel to the clinic and the time lost from work. The LHCs had particular difficulty in working with patients with extreme social difficulties or alcohol related problems, and elderly patients, as the intervention seemed unable to address their specific needs. The control arm GPs adopted practices similar to the principles of the MANAS intervention; GPs routinely diagnosed CMD and provided psychoeducation, advice on life style changes and problem solving, prescribed antidepressants, and referred to specialists as appropriate.
Conclusion:
The key factors which enhance the acceptability and integration of a LHC in primary care are training, systematic steps to build trust, the passage of time, the observable impacts on patient outcomes, and supervision by a visiting psychiatrist. Several practices by the control arm GPs approximated those of the LHC which may partly explain our findings that they were as effective as the MANAS intervention arm GPs in enabling recovery.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/26</link>
                <dc:creator>Bernadette Pereira</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Gracy Andrew</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Sulochana Pednekar</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Betty Kirkwood</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Vikram Patel</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:26</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-10-03T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-26</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-26-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>26</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-10-03T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/24">
        <title>Validation of the Child Post Traumatic Stress Disorder-Reaction Index in Zambia</title>
        <description>Background:
Sexual violence against children is a major global health and human rights problem. In order to address this issue there needs to be a better understanding of the issue and the consequences. One major challenge in accomplishing this goal has been a lack of validated child mental health assessments in low-resource countries where the prevalence of sexual violence is high. This paper presents results from a validation study of a trauma-focused mental health assessment tool - the UCLA Post-traumatic Stress Disorder - Reaction Index (PTSD-RI) in Zambia.
Methods:
The PTSD-RI was adapted through the addition of locally relevant items and validated using local responses to three cross-cultural criterion validity questions. Reliability of the symptoms scale was assessed using Cronbach alpha analyses. Discriminant validity was assessed comparing mean scale scores of cases and non-cases. Concurrent validity was assessed comparing mean scale scores to a traumatic experience index. Sensitivity and specificity analyses were run using receiver operating curves.
Results:
Analysis of data from 352 youth attending a clinic specializing in sexual abuse showed that this adapted PTSD-RI demonstrated good reliability, with Cronbach alpha scores greater than .90 on all the evaluated scales. The symptom scales were able to statistically significantly discriminate between locally identified cases and non-cases, and higher symptom scale scores were associated with increased numbers of trauma exposures which is an indication of concurrent validity. Sensitivity and specificity analyses resulted in an adequate area under the curve, indicating that this tool was appropriate for case definition.
Conclusions:
This study has shown that validating mental health assessment tools in a low-resource country is feasible, and that by taking the time to adapt a measure to the local context, a useful and valid Zambian version of the PTSD-RI was developed to detect traumatic stress among youth. This valid tool can now be used to appropriately measure treatment effectiveness, and more effectively and efficiently triage youth to appropriate services.</description>
        <link>http://www.ijmhs.com/content/5/1/24</link>
                <dc:creator>Laura Murray</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Judith Bass</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Elwyn Chomba</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Mwiya Imasiku</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Donald Thea</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Katherine Semrau</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Judith Cohen</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Carrie Lam</dc:creator>
                <dc:creator>Paul Bolton</dc:creator>
                <dc:source>International Journal of Mental Health Systems 2011, null:24</dc:source>
        <dc:date>2011-09-24T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
        <dc:identifier>doi:10.1186/1752-4458-5-24</dc:identifier>
                                <prism:require>/content/figures/1752-4458-5-24-toc.gif</prism:require>
                <prism:publicationName>International Journal of Mental Health Systems</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:issn>1752-4458</prism:issn>
        <prism:volume>${item.volume}</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>24</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>2011-09-24T00:00:00Z</prism:publicationDate>
                <prism:versionidentifier>XML</prism:versionidentifier>
                <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
    </cc:License>
</rdf:RDF>

