Suchergebnisse

Aim: The current research was conducted in the context of an ongoing reform of mental health services in the Republic of Moldova since 2014, where efforts have been devoted to creating community-based mental health services. This article presents a snapshot of the needs of mental health service users in the Republic of Moldova and helps to understand how and with which services their needs can be addressed. Methods: This cross-sectional study compared the levels of needs (CANSAS scale), quality of life (EQ-5D 3L), mental health status (MINI for psychotic disorders) and functioning (WHO-DAS) among mental health service users in the psychiatric hospital in Chisinau, Moldova. All service users resided in districts where community mental health services were being developed. Correlations between quality of life, functioning and unmet need were explored. Results: Of 83 participants, one third had a psychotic or a mood disorder. On average, participants reported needs in 9.41 domains ( SD = 4.41), of which 4.29 were unmet ( SD = 3.63). Most unmet needs related to intimacy and relation to others. The level of functioning and quality of life were reported. We found strong, negative associations between the number of unmet needs and level of functioning, as well as the quality of life. We also found that higher functioning levels were positively associated with higher quality of life. Conclusion: There were a high number of unmet needs among this inpatient population, particularly social needs and service-related needs. A continuum of inpatient and outpatient care and individual treatment plans can help address the different needs of different patients. Individual treatment plans for patients and the choice of the appropriate treatment for patients could be guided by an assessment of service users' (unmet) needs of care and level of functioning.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to the disruption of mental health services in most countries. Croatia has been developing and strengthening its mental health system, including the introduction of community mental health teams (CMHT) for persons with severe mental illness (SMI), whose implementation was ongoing during the pandemic through the RECOVER-E project. Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the differences in mental health outcomes, perceived social support and healthcare utilization in the group of participants receiving treatment as usual (TAU group) compared to the group receiving TAU and additional care by the CMHT (CMHT group) during the COVID-19 pandemic and two earthquakes. Method: This is a cross-sectional survey administered among 90 participants with SMI at two time points: in May/June 2020 (first COVID-19 wave, earthquake) and in December 2020/January 2021 (second COVID-19 wave, earthquake). Results: A significantly larger proportion of participants from the CMHT group visited the general practitioners in both waves of COVID-19 (first wave: CMHT 72.1%, TAU 44.2%, p = .009; second wave: CMHT 91.1%, TAU 64.1%, p = .003), as well as psychiatric services in the second wave (CMHT 95.3%, TAU 79.5%, p = .028). The use of long-acting injectables was also more frequent in the CMHT group ( p = .039). Furthermore, analysis of the first wave showed higher perceived support of significant others ( p = .004) in the CMHT group. We did not identify any differences in mental health outcomes between groups in either wave. Conclusions: While mental health outcomes did not differ between TAU and CMHT group, people in CMHT used services and treatments more frequently than those in TAU during the pandemic, which may indicate that CMHT services enable the continuity and accessibility of care for people with SMI under the circumstances where standard care is interruped (for example pandemic, disaster conditions).

Previous research shows that crises can have both negative and positive mental health effects on the population. The current study explored these effects in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic after relaxation of governmental measures. An online survey was administered among a representative sample of the Dutch population (n = 1519) in June 2020, ten weeks after the peak of COVID-19 had passed, and five weeks after restrictions were relaxed. Participants were asked about mental health, adverse events during COVID-19, and about any positive effects of the pandemic. Most participants (80%, n = 1207) reported no change in mental health since the COVID-19 pandemic. This was also the case among respondents who had experienced an adverse event. Protective factors of mental health were being male and high levels of positive mental well-being. Risk factors were emotional loneliness and the experience of adverse life events. Social loneliness was positively associated with stable mental health, stressing the importance of meaningful relationships. Note that 58% of participants reported positive effects of the pandemic, the most common of which were rest, working from home, and feeling more socially connected. In summary, 10 weeks after the start of the crisis, and 5 weeks after relaxation of the restrictions, most people remained stable during the crisis, and were even able to report positive effects.

BackgroundService providers throughout Europe have identified the need to define how high-quality community-based mental health care looks to organize their own services and to inform governments, commissioners and funders. In 2016, representatives of mental health care service providers, networks, umbrella organizations and knowledge institutes in Europe came together to establish the European Community Mental Health Services Provider (EUCOMS) Network. This network developed a shared vision on the principles and key elements of community mental health care in different contexts. The result is a comprehensive consensus paper, of which this position paper is an outline.With this paper the network wants to contribute to the discussion on how to improve structures in mental healthcare, and to narrow the gap between evidence, policy and practice in Europe.Main textThe development of the consensus paper started with an expert workshop in April 2016. An assigned writing group representing the workshop participants built upon the outcomes of this meeting and developed the consensus paper with the input from 100 European counterparts through two additional work groups, and two structured feedback rounds via email.High quality community-based mental health care: 1) protects human rights; 2) has a public health focus; 3) supports service users in their recovery journey; 4) makes use of effective interventions based on evidence and client goals; 5) promotes a wide network of support in the community and; 6) makes use of peer expertise in service design and delivery. Each principle is illustrated with good practices from European service providers that are members of the EUCOMS Network.ConclusionsDiscussion among EUCOMS network members resulted in a blueprint for a regional model of integrated mental health care based upon six principles.

Background Service providers throughout Europe have identified the need to define how high-quality community-based mental health care looks to organize their own services and to inform governments, commissioners and funders. In 2016, representatives of mental health care service providers, networks, umbrella organizations and knowledge institutes in Europe came together to establish the European Community Mental Health Services Provider (EUCOMS) Network. This network developed a shared vision on the principles and key elements of community mental health care in different contexts. The result is a comprehensive consensus paper, of which this position paper is an outline. With this paper the network wants to contribute to the discussion on how to improve structures in mental healthcare, and to narrow the gap between evidence, policy and practice in Europe. Main text The development of the consensus paper started with an expert workshop in April 2016. An assigned writing group representing the workshop participants built upon the outcomes of this meeting and developed the consensus paper with the input from 100 European counterparts through two additional work groups, and two structured feedback rounds via email. High quality community-based mental health care: 1) protects human rights; 2) has a public health focus; 3) supports service users in their recovery journey; 4) makes use of effective interventions based on evidence and client goals; 5) promotes a wide network of support in the community and; 6) makes use of peer expertise in service design and delivery. Each principle is illustrated with good practices from European service providers that are members of the EUCOMS Network. Conclusions Discussion among EUCOMS network members resulted in a blueprint for a regional model of integrated mental health care based upon six principles.