Community mental health literacy in Tshwane region 1: A quantitative study

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY South African Journal of Psychiatry Pub Date : 2022-02-22 DOI:10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v28i0.1661
D. Madlala, P. Joubert, A. Masenge
{"title":"Community mental health literacy in Tshwane region 1: A quantitative study","authors":"D. Madlala, P. Joubert, A. Masenge","doi":"10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v28i0.1661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Although mental health literacy is a major determining factor of mental health outcomes and functional capacity of individuals, there is dearth of research on the issue in South Africa. Aim To assess the literacy of three mental disorders, namely major depressive disorder (MDD), schizophrenia and generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) and to compare the resultant assumed literacy level between urban and townships participants. Setting Five clinics of region 1 in Tshwane, South Africa. Method A cross-sectional descriptive study was performed between November 2019 and January 2020. A total of 385 questionnaires were distributed equally in all five clinics. By means of questions about three fictive cases with clinical pictures indicative of MDD, schizophrenia and GAD the following were assessed: recognising a mental disorder, identifying the cause and knowledge about what would help best. Results The majority of participants (67.3%) recognised the clinical picture indicative of schizophrenia as a mental disorder, almost half of the participants (49.9%) recognised the clinical picture indicative of MDD as a mental disorder, whilst just more than one third (36.3%) of participants recognised the clinical picture GAD as a mental disorder. Concerning the causes for the clinical pictures, most participants indicated that stress was the cause for MDD and GAD (77.4% and 68.1%, respectively), whilst indicating that biological or psychological (59.5%) causes are relevant to the clinical picture indicative of schizophrenia symptoms. Fewer participants indicated supernatural causes for any of the clinical case (MDD: 2.6%; schizophrenia 15.3%; GAD 4.2%). Most participants chose professional help as the best option for all three cases (MDD 81.3%, schizophrenia 82.2%, GAD 66.1%). The indicators for health literacy in this study show that urban participants had better knowledge than township participants across all questions about the cases. Conclusion Overall, the study indicated a variable knowledge regarding the three mental disorders in region 1 of Tshwane and variable literacy levels in townships compared with urban settings. The results indicate that awareness campaigns should focus on the deficient areas.","PeriodicalId":51156,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v28i0.1661","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background Although mental health literacy is a major determining factor of mental health outcomes and functional capacity of individuals, there is dearth of research on the issue in South Africa. Aim To assess the literacy of three mental disorders, namely major depressive disorder (MDD), schizophrenia and generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) and to compare the resultant assumed literacy level between urban and townships participants. Setting Five clinics of region 1 in Tshwane, South Africa. Method A cross-sectional descriptive study was performed between November 2019 and January 2020. A total of 385 questionnaires were distributed equally in all five clinics. By means of questions about three fictive cases with clinical pictures indicative of MDD, schizophrenia and GAD the following were assessed: recognising a mental disorder, identifying the cause and knowledge about what would help best. Results The majority of participants (67.3%) recognised the clinical picture indicative of schizophrenia as a mental disorder, almost half of the participants (49.9%) recognised the clinical picture indicative of MDD as a mental disorder, whilst just more than one third (36.3%) of participants recognised the clinical picture GAD as a mental disorder. Concerning the causes for the clinical pictures, most participants indicated that stress was the cause for MDD and GAD (77.4% and 68.1%, respectively), whilst indicating that biological or psychological (59.5%) causes are relevant to the clinical picture indicative of schizophrenia symptoms. Fewer participants indicated supernatural causes for any of the clinical case (MDD: 2.6%; schizophrenia 15.3%; GAD 4.2%). Most participants chose professional help as the best option for all three cases (MDD 81.3%, schizophrenia 82.2%, GAD 66.1%). The indicators for health literacy in this study show that urban participants had better knowledge than township participants across all questions about the cases. Conclusion Overall, the study indicated a variable knowledge regarding the three mental disorders in region 1 of Tshwane and variable literacy levels in townships compared with urban settings. The results indicate that awareness campaigns should focus on the deficient areas.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
茨瓦内地区社区心理健康素养1:定量研究
背景虽然心理健康素养是个人心理健康结果和功能能力的主要决定因素,但南非缺乏对这一问题的研究。目的评估三种精神障碍,即重度抑郁症(MDD)、精神分裂症和广泛性焦虑症(GAD)的识字率,并比较城乡参与者的假设识字率。设置南非茨瓦内地区1的5个诊所。方法于2019年11月至2020年1月进行横断面描述性研究。共有385份问卷在所有五个诊所平均分发。通过对三个具有临床症状的MDD、精神分裂症和广泛性焦虑症的实际病例的提问,评估了以下内容:识别精神障碍,确定病因,了解什么能最好地帮助他们。结果大多数参与者(67.3%)认为精神分裂症的临床表现为精神障碍,几乎一半的参与者(49.9%)认为重度抑郁症的临床表现为精神障碍,而只有超过三分之一(36.3%)的参与者认为广泛性焦虑症的临床表现为精神障碍。关于临床症状的原因,大多数参与者表示压力是MDD和GAD的原因(分别为77.4%和68.1%),而生物或心理原因(59.5%)与精神分裂症症状的临床症状有关。较少的参与者指出任何临床病例的超自然原因(MDD: 2.6%;精神分裂症的15.3%;迦得4.2%)。大多数参与者选择专业帮助作为所有三种情况的最佳选择(MDD 81.3%,精神分裂症82.2%,广域焦虑症66.1%)。本研究的健康素养指标表明,城市参与者比乡镇参与者对病例的所有问题都有更好的了解。结论总体而言,研究表明茨瓦内第1区对三种精神障碍的认知存在差异,乡镇的文化水平与城市相比存在差异。结果表明,宣传活动应以不足地区为重点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal is the leading psychiatric journal of Africa. It provides open-access scholarly reading for psychiatrists, clinical psychologists and all with an interest in mental health. It carries empirical and conceptual research articles, reviews, editorials, and scientific letters related to psychiatry. It publishes work from various places in the world, and makes special provision for the interests of Africa. It seeks to serve its readership and researchers with the most topical content in psychiatry for clinical practice and academic pursuits, including work in the subspecialty areas of psychiatry.
期刊最新文献
The lifeworld of families of mental health care users in rural South Africa: A phenomenological study. Knowledge and attitudes towards electroconvulsive therapy in an academic psychiatric department. Teaching transference focused psychotherapy to South African mental health practitioners. Safety and effectiveness of methylphenidate ER multi-unit pellet system in ADHD patients: An open label study. An in depth review of body shaming phenomenon among adolescent: Trigger factors, psychological impact and prevention efforts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1