Epidemiologia e psichiatria sociale最新文献

Aim: We aimed at developing a prioritized set of quality indicators for schizophrenia care to be used for continuous quality monitoring. They should be evidence-based and rely on routine data.

Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify papers on validated quality indicators published between 1990 to April 2008 in MEDLINE, the Cochrane databases, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Databases of relevant national and international organizations were searched. Indicators were described with respect to meaningfulness, feasibility and actionability. A workshop with relevant stakeholders evaluated the measures through a structured consensus process.

Results: We identified 78 indicators through literature search and selected 22 quality indicators. Furthermore, 12 structural and case-mix indicators were choosen. Only five quality indicators were rated "essential indicators" (priority 1), 14 were rated "additional first choice" (priority 2), and three were rated as "additional second choice" (priority 3). Only four indicators assessed outcome quality. In the majority of indicators the evidence base supporting the indicator recommendation was weak. None of the selected indicators was validated in experimental studies.

Conclusions: Evidence and validation base played only a subordinate role for indicator prioritisation by stakeholders indicating that there are discrepancies between clinical questions and requirements in schizophrenia care and scientific research.

Aims: The Diagnostic Interview for Psychoses (DIP) is a comprehensive interview schedule for psychotic disorders, linked to the OPCRIT diagnostic algorithm, bridging the gap between fully structured, lay-administered schedules and semistructured, psychiatrist-administered interviews. Here we describe the validity, reliability and applications of the Italian version of the DIP.

Methods: The interview was translated into Italian and its content validity tested by back translation. Sixty patients, drawn from among those who contacted the South-Verona Community Mental Health Service, were included in the study. Each patient was first assessed independently by two raters, one of whom conducted the interview, while the other assumed the role of observer. Subsequently (median: 89 days), 44 of these patients were re-interviewed by a third rater, who made an independent assessment. Diagnostic validity was assessed in 18 cases, interviewed with the DIP and using the SCAN as 'gold standard'.

Results: The mean duration of the interview was 37 minutes for the inter-rater interviews and 39 minutes for the retest interviews. Good to excellent inter-rater reliability was demonstrated for both ICD-10 and DSM-IV diagnoses, while in the test-retest reliability pairwise agreement was high for half of the items. Diagnostic validity was good, with twelve out of the 18 DIP-OPCRIT diagnoses (67%) matching the SCAN diagnosis.

Conclusions: Overall, the results support the reliability and validity of the Italian translation of the DIP. The Italian version will be useful both in routine practice to establish standard reference diagnoses of psychosis and in the research field, where it can be used by academic researchers in clinical trials and epidemiological studies.

An extensive literature documented a mortality differential for natural causes between psychiatric patients and the general population. Less clear is the pattern for cancer diseases. Methodological problems arise when trying to explain such mortality gap: selection bias and reverse causation; time-dependent confounders that are also intermediate variables; complex relationships within a life course have to be considered. We try to explain such problems in terms of causal graphs. Excess risk for causes of death which are not attributable to higher prevalence of risk factors or treatment side-effects and higher mortality rates for avoidable causes have been also documented. These findings underline the need for research on health promotion and preventive programs targeted to psychiatric patients.

Aim: To develop and measure consensus about which type of message should be included in population-level campaigns to reduce mental health-related stigma.

Methods: A panel of 32 experts attending an international conference on mental health stigma participated in a consensus development exercise. A modified nominal group technique was used incorporating two voting rounds, an overview of research evidence and group discussion.

Results: There was high consensus (> or = 80%) regarding the inclusion of two of the message types presented--(i) recovery-oriented and (ii) see the person messages, and reasonable consensus (> or = 70%) regarding (iii) social inclusion/human rights and (iv) high prevalence of mental disorders messages. Ratings differed according to whether the participant was a psychiatrist or had personal experience of mental ill health. Analysis of the qualitative data revealed four themes: (i) benefits of messages countering the 'otherness' of people with mental ill health; (ii) problematic nature of messages referring to aetiology; (iii) message impact being dependent on the particular audience; (iv) need for specific packages of messages.

Conclusions: This study supports the use of recovery-oriented messages and see the person messages. Social inclusion/human rights messages and high prevalence of mental disorders messages also merit consideration.

Individuals with schizophrenia have higher mortality rates compared to the general community. Apart from an increased risk of suicide, people with schizophrenia have an increased risk of death related to a wide range of comorbid physical conditions. There is evidence to suggest that much of this mortality is avoidable. The provision of assertive management of comorbid physical disorders has the potential to help close the differential mortality gap. While the primary data are robust, there is less empirical evidence to guide policy makers and service providers when dealing with these problems. Focused clinical programs aimed at reducing risk factors (e.g. smoking, obesity) and shared care between mental health teams and primary care providers can help reduce the burden of avoidable deaths. In light of recent evidence suggesting that the mortality gap has widened in recent decades, there is an urgent need to address the burden of avoidable deaths in those with serious mental illnesses.

Given the uncontested role of psychiatric illnesses in both fatal and non-fatal suicidal behaviours, efforts are continuously made in improving mental health care provision. In cases of severe mental disorder, when intensified treatment protocols and continuous supervision are required due to individual's impaired emotional, cognitive and social functioning (including danger to self and others), psychiatric hospitalisation is warranted. However, to date there is no convincing evidence that in-patient care prevents suicide. In fact, quite paradoxically, both admissions to a psychiatric ward and recent discharge from it have been found to increase risk for suicidal behaviours. What elements in the chain of well-intentioned approaches to treating psychiatric illness and suicidality fail to protect this vulnerable population is still unclear. The same holds true for the identifications of factors that may increase the risk for suicide. This editorial discusses current knowledge on this subject, proposing strategies that might improve prevention.