Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Purpose
Exposure to traumatic events may lead to the development of Acute Stress Disorder (ASD) within the first month post-trauma in some individuals, while others may not exhibit ASD symptoms. ASD was introduced as a potential early indicator to identify those at higher risk of developing Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), however, PTSD can occur in some individuals even without prior ASD. Assessing ASD post-trauma can assist in identifying those who would most benefit from intervention to prevent later PTSD, yet the predictive power of ASD varies across studies, with intensity of ASD symptoms and subthreshold PTSD often less considered.

Methods
A prospective cohort study on 426 health workers exposed to the Beirut Port Blast assessed DSM-5 ASD and symptom intensity using self-report questionnaire at two distinct time points: 9–15 and 21–27 days post blast. DSM-5 PTSD was assessed afterwards at 6–7 months via self-report questionnaire post-exposure. Probit models predicted full and subthreshold PTSD.

Results
Using ASD diagnosis alone, the sensitivity 9–15 days after trauma was better than 21–27 days after trauma (75.68% vs. 58.06%); when stratified by intensity, however, sensitivity increased from 41.66% among those with low intensity to 92% among those with high intensity. Specificity, however, was better 21–27 days after trauma (77.82%) compared with 9–15 days (60.98%). Positive Predictive Value of ASD increased, and Negative Predictive Value decreased, with time since exposure and when adding intensity with diagnosis. ASD diagnosis plus intensity achieved better prediction of PTSD and subthreshold PTSD.

Conclusion
Screening for PTSD should include ASD and its intensity, improving predictive ability for later PTSD, incorporatingfull threshold and subthreshold PTSD. Specificity increases with time since exposure, suggesting a high rate of false positives when assessing ASD soon after trauma. This highlights the need to prioritize individuals for early preventive measures after trauma.

Background: Preliminary country-specific reports suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on the mental health of the healthcare workforce. In this paper, we summarize the protocol of the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study, an ongoing, global initiative, aimed to describe and track longitudinal trajectories of mental health symptoms and disorders among health care workers at different phases of the pandemic across a wide range of countries in Latin America, Europe, Africa, Middle-East, and Asia. Methods: Participants from various settings, including primary care clinics, hospitals, nursing homes, and mental health facilities, are being enrolled. In 26 countries, we are using a similar study design with harmonized measures to capture data on COVID-19 related exposures and variables of interest during two years of follow-up. Exposures include potential stressors related to working in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as sociodemographic and clinical factors. Primary outcomes of interest include mental health variables such as psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic stress disorders. Other domains of interest include potentially mediating or moderating influences such as workplace conditions, trust in the government, and the country's income level. Results: As of August 2021, ~ 34,000 health workers have been recruited. A general characterization of the recruited samples by sociodemographic and workplace variables is presented. Most participating countries have identified several health facilities where they can identify denominators and attain acceptable response rates. Of the 26 countries, 22 are collecting data and 2 plan to start shortly. Conclusions: This is one of the most extensive global studies on the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, including a variety of countries with diverse economic realities and different levels of severity of pandemic and management. Moreover, unlike most previous studies, we included workers (clinical and non-clinical staff) in a wide range of settings. ; Background: Preliminary country-specific reports suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on the mental health of the healthcare workforce. In this paper, we summarize the protocol of the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study, an ongoing, global initiative, aimed to describe and track longitudinal trajectories of mental health symptoms and disorders among health care workers at different phases of the pandemic across a wide range of countries in Latin America, Europe, Africa, Middle-East, and Asia. Methods: Participants from various settings, including primary care clinics, hospitals, nursing homes, and mental health facilities, are being enrolled. In 26 countries, we are using a similar study design with harmonized measures to capture data on COVID-19 related exposures and variables of interest during two years of follow-up. Exposures include potential stressors related to working in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as sociodemographic and clinical factors. Primary outcomes of interest include mental health variables such as psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic stress disorders. Other domains of interest include potentially mediating or moderating influences such as workplace conditions, trust in the government, and the country's income level. Results: As of August 2021, ~ 34,000 health workers have been recruited. A general characterization of the recruited samples by sociodemographic and workplace variables is presented. Most participating countries have identified several health facilities where they can identify denominators and attain acceptable response rates. Of the 26 countries, 22 are collecting data and 2 plan to start shortly. Conclusions: This is one of the most extensive global studies on the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, including a variety of countries with diverse economic realities and different levels of severity of pandemic and management. Moreover, unlike most previous studies, we included workers (clinical and non-clinical staff) in a wide range of settings.

Stigma is one of the main barriers for the full implementation of mental health services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Recently, many initiatives to reduce stigma have been launched in these settings. Nevertheless, the extent to which these interventions are effective and culturally sensitive remains largely unknown. The present review addresses these two issues by conducting a comprehensive evaluation of interventions to reduce stigma toward mental illness that have been implemented in LMICs. We conducted a scoping review of scientific papers in the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, EBSCO, OVID, Embase, and SciELO. Keywords in English, Spanish, and Portuguese were included. Articles published from January 1990 to December 2017 were incorporated into this article. Overall, the studies were of low-to-medium methodological quality—most only included evaluations after intervention or short follow-up periods (1–3 months). The majority of programs focused on improving knowledge and attitudes through the education of healthcare professionals, community members, or consumers. Only 20% (5/25) of the interventions considered cultural values, meanings, and practices. This gap is discussed in the light of evidence from cultural studies conducted in both low and high income countries. Considering the methodological shortcomings and the absence of cultural adaptation, future efforts should consider better research designs, with longer follow-up periods, and more suitable strategies to incorporate relevant cultural features of each community.

Stigma toward people with mental illness and substance use problems is a significant global concern, and prevents people with these conditions from accessing treatment, particularly in primary health care (PHC) settings. Stigma is a cultural phenomenon that is influenced by particular contexts and can differ by country and region. The majority of stigma research focuses on Europe or North America leading to a lack of culturally relevant stigma research instruments for the Latin American context. The present study describes and discusses the methodology for cross-culturally adapting four stigma measurement scales to the Chilean context. The cross-cultural adaptation process included nine phases: (1) preparation; (2) independent translations; (3) synthesis 1 with expert committee; (4) focus groups and interviews with researchers, PHC professionals, and PHC users; (5) synthesis 2 with expert committee; (6) independent back translations; (7) synthesis 3 with expert committee; (8) pilot with PHC professionals; and (9) final revisions. The adaptation process included an array of diverse voices from the PHC context, and met three adaptation objectives defined prior to beginning the process (Understandability, Relevance, and Acceptability and Answer Options). The resulting, culturally adapted questionnaire is being validated and implemented within PHC settings across Chile to provide in-depth insight into stigma among PHC professionals in the country. The authors hope it will be useful for future research on mental illness and substance use stigma in similar settings across Latin America.

Background: Latin America, and Chile in particular, has a rich tradition of community mental health services and programs. However, in vivo community-based psychosocial interventions, especially those with a recovery-oriented approach, remain scarce in the region. Between 2014 and 2015, a Critical Time Intervention-Task Shifting project (CTI-TS) was implemented in Santiago, Chile, as part of a larger pilot randomized control trial. CTI is a time-limited intervention delivered at a critical-time to users, is organized by phases, focuses on specific objectives and decreases in intensity over time. CTI-TS, which combines both the task-shifting strategy and the use of peers, introduces a novel approach to community mental health care that has not yet been tried in Chile. Aims: We aim to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and applicability of such a community-based psychosocial intervention in urban settings in Latin America – specifically, in Santiago (Chile) from a user perspective. Method: We analyzed 15 in-depth interviews ( n = 15) with service users who participated in the intervention about their perceptions and experiences with CTI-TS through thematic analysis. Results: Three themes were revealed. The first was related to the structural characteristics of CTI-TS, especially regarding the timing, duration and phasic nature of the intervention. The second pertained to the acceptability of the in vivo community-based approach. The third theme dealt with the task-shifting aspect, that is, users' perceptions of the peer support workers and the community mental health workers. Conclusions: CTI-TS was generally acceptable in this Latin American context. Users' perspectives pointed to the need to make adjustments to some of the structural characteristics of the CTI model and to combine this type of intervention with others that can address stigma. Thus, future adaptations of CTI-TS or similar psychosocial interventions in Latin American contexts are feasible and can enhance community mental health in the region.

Background Preliminary country-specific reports suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on the mental health of the healthcare workforce. In this paper, we summarize the protocol of the COVID-19 HEalth caRe wOrkErS (HEROES) study, an ongoing, global initiative, aimed to describe and track longitudinal trajectories of mental health symptoms and disorders among health care workers at different phases of the pandemic across a wide range of countries in Latin America, Europe, Africa, Middle-East, and Asia. Methods Participants from various settings, including primary care clinics, hospitals, nursing homes, and mental health facilities, are being enrolled. In 26 countries, we are using a similar study design with harmonized measures to capture data on COVID-19 related exposures and variables of interest during two years of follow-up. Exposures include potential stressors related to working in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as sociodemographic and clinical factors. Primary outcomes of interest include mental health variables such as psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic stress disorders. Other domains of interest include potentially mediating or moderating influences such as workplace conditions, trust in the government, and the country's income level. Results As of August 2021, similar to 34,000 health workers have been recruited. A general characterization of the recruited samples by sociodemographic and workplace variables is presented. Most participating countries have identified several health facilities where they can identify denominators and attain acceptable response rates. Of the 26 countries, 22 are collecting data and 2 plan to start shortly. Conclusions This is one of the most extensive global studies on the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, including a variety of countries with diverse economic realities and different levels of severity of pandemic and management. Moreover, unlike most previous studies, we ...