Sarah Clement

What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking?: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies

BACKGROUND Individuals often avoid or delay seeking professional help for mental health problems. Stigma may be a key deterrent to help-seeking but this has not been reviewed systematically. Our systematic review addressed the overarching question: What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking for mental health problems? Subquestions were: (a) What is the size and direction of any association between stigma and help-seeking? (b) To what extent is stigma identified as a barrier to help-seeking? (c) What processes underlie the relationship between stigma and help-seeking? (d) Are there population groups for which stigma disproportionately deters help-seeking? METHOD Five electronic databases were searched from 1980 to 2011 and references of reviews checked. A meta-synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies, comprising three parallel narrative syntheses and subgroup analyses, was conducted. RESULTS The review identified 144 studies with 90,189 participants meeting inclusion criteria. The median association between stigma and help-seeking was d = - 0.27, with internalized and treatment stigma being most often associated with reduced help-seeking. Stigma was the fourth highest ranked barrier to help-seeking, with disclosure concerns the most commonly reported stigma barrier. A detailed conceptual model was derived that describes the processes contributing to, and counteracting, the deterrent effect of stigma on help-seeking. Ethnic minorities, youth, men and those in military and health professions were disproportionately deterred by stigma. CONCLUSIONS Stigma has a small- to moderate-sized negative effect on help-seeking. Review findings can be used to help inform the design of interventions to increase help-seeking.

Nurse management of patients with minor illnesses in general practice: multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Abstract Objective: To assess the acceptability and safety of a minor illness service led by practice nurses in general practice. Design: Multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Setting: 5 general practices in south east London and Kent representing semi-rural, suburban, and urban settings. Participants: 1815 patients requesting and offered same day appointments by receptionists. Intervention: Patients were assigned to treatment by either a specially trained nurse or a general practitioner. Patients seen by a nurse were referred to a general practitioner when appropriate. Main outcome measures: The general satisfaction of the patients as measured by the consultation satisfaction questionnaire. Other outcome measures included the length of the consultation, number of prescriptions written, rates of referral to general practitioners, patients reported health status, patients anticipated behaviour in seeking health care in future, and number of patients who returned to the surgery, visits to accident and emergency, and out of hours calls to doctors. Results: Patients were very satisfied with both nurses and doctors, but they were significantly more satisfied with their consultations with nurses (mean (SD) score of satisfaction 78.6(16.0) of 100 points for nurses v 76.4 (17.8) for doctors; 95% confidence interval for difference between means −4.07 to −0.38). Consultations with nurses took about 10 minutes compared with about 8 minutes for consultations with doctors. Nurses and doctors wrote prescriptions for a similar proportion of patients (nurses 481/736 (65.4%) v doctors 518/816 (63.5%)). 577/790 (73%) patients seen by nurses were managed without any input from doctors. Conclusion: Practice nurses seem to offer an effective service for patients with minor illnesses who request same day appointments.

Experiences of mental illness stigma, prejudice and discrimination: a review of measures

BackgroundThere has been a substantial increase in research on mental illness related stigma over the past 10 years, with many measures in use. This study aims to review current practice in the survey measurement of mental illness stigma, prejudice and discrimination experienced by people who have personal experience of mental illness. We will identify measures used, their characteristics and psychometric properties.MethodA narrative literature review of survey measures of mental illness stigma was conducted. The databases Medline, PsychInfo and the British Nursing Index were searched for the period 1990-2009.Results57 studies were included in the review. 14 survey measures of mental illness stigma were identified. Seven of the located measures addressed aspects of perceived stigma, 10 aspects of experienced stigma and 5 aspects of self-stigma. Of the identified studies, 79% used one of the measures of perceived stigma, 46% one of the measures of experienced stigma and 33% one of the measures of self-stigma. All measures presented some information on psychometric properties.ConclusionsThe review was structured by considering perceived, experienced and self stigma as separate but related constructs. It provides a resource to aid researchers in selecting the measure of mental illness stigma which is most appropriate to their purpose.

A randomised controlled trial comparing two schedules of antenatal visits: the antenatal care project.

Abstract Objective: To compare the clinical and psychosocial effectiveness of the traditional British antenatal visit schedule (traditional care) with a reduced schedule of visits (new style care) for low risk women, together with maternal and professional satisfaction with care. Design: Randomised controlled trial. Setting: Places in south east London providing antenatal care for women receiving shared care and planning to deliver in one of three hospitals or at home. Subjects: 2794 women at low risk fulfilling the trials inclusion criteria between June 1993 and July 1994. Main outcome measures: Measures of fetal and maternal morbidity, health service use, psychosocial outcomes, and maternal and professional satisfaction. Results: Pregnant women allocated to new style care had fewer day admissions (0.8 v 1.0; P=0.002) and ultrasound scans (1.6 v 1.7; P=0.003) and were less often suspected of carrying fetuses that were small for gestational age (odds ration 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.99). They also had some poorer psychosocial outcomes: for example, they were more worried about fetal wellbeing antenatally and coping with the baby postnatally, and they had more negative attitudes to their babies, both in pregnancy and postnatally. These women were also more dissatisfied with the number of visits they received (odds ratio 2.50; 2.00 to 3.11). Conclusions: Patterns of antenatal care involving fewer routine visits for women at low risk may lead to reduced psychosocial effectiveness and dissatisfaction with frequency of visits. The number of antenatal day admissions and ultrasound scans performed may also be reduced. For the variables reported, the visit schedules studied are similar in their clinical effectiveness. Uncertainty remains as to the clinical effectiveness of reduced visit schedules for rare pregnancy problems. Key messages Key messages Women offered a reduced schedule of antenatal visits had a similar rate of caesarean sections for pregnancy related hypertensive disorders Women having fewer antenatal visits had fewer ultrasound scans and fewer antenatal day admissions Fewer antenatal visits may lead to poorer psychosocial outcomes and greater dissatisfaction among women More flexible approaches to the provision of psychosocial support and the reassurance of women about fetal wellbeing may be needed if reduced schedules of antenatal visits are to be introduced

Evidence for effective interventions to reduce mental-health-related stigma and discrimination

Stigma and discrimination in relation to mental illnesses have been described as having worse consequences than the conditions themselves. Most medical literature in this area of research has been descriptive and has focused on attitudes towards people with mental illness rather than on interventions to reduce stigma. In this narrative Review, we summarise what is known globally from published systematic reviews and primary data on effective interventions intended to reduce mental-illness-related stigma or discrimination. The main findings emerging from this narrative overview are that: (1) at the population level there is a fairly consistent pattern of short-term benefits for positive attitude change, and some lesser evidence for knowledge improvement; (2) for people with mental illness, some group-level anti-stigma inventions show promise and merit further assessment; (3) for specific target groups, such as students, social-contact-based interventions usually achieve short-term (but less clearly long-term) attitudinal improvements, and less often produce knowledge gains; (4) this is a heterogeneous field of study with few strong study designs with large sample sizes; (5) research from low-income and middle-income countries is conspicuous by its relative absence; (6) caution needs to be exercised in not overgeneralising lessons from one target group to another; (7) there is a clear need for studies with longer-term follow-up to assess whether initial gains are sustained or attenuated, and whether booster doses of the intervention are needed to maintain progress; (8) few studies in any part of the world have focused on either the service users perspective of stigma and discrimination or on the behaviour domain of behavioural change, either by people with or without mental illness in the complex processes of stigmatisation. We found that social contact is the most effective type of intervention to improve stigma-related knowledge and attitudes in the short term. However, the evidence for longer-term benefit of such social contact to reduce stigma is weak. In view of the magnitude of challenges that result from mental health stigma and discrimination, a concerted effort is needed to fund methodologically strong research that will provide robust evidence to support decisions on investment in interventions to reduce stigma.

Complex interventions to improve the health of people with limited literacy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the published literature on the effects of complex (multi-faceted) interventions intended to improve the health-related outcomes of individuals with limited literacy or numeracy. METHODS We undertook a systematic review of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials with a narrative synthesis. The search strategy included searching eight databases from start date to 2007, reference checking and contacting expert informants. After the initial screen, two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, extracted data and evaluated study quality. RESULTS The searches yielded 2734 non-duplicate items, which were reduced to 15 trials. Two interventions were directed at health professionals, one intervention was literacy education, and 12 were health education/management interventions. The quality of the trials was mixed, 13/15 trials were conducted in North America, and all focused on literacy rather than numeracy. 13/15 trials reported at least one significant difference in primary outcome, all favoring the intervention group. Only 8/15 trials measured direct clinical outcomes. Knowledge and self-efficacy were the class of outcome most likely to improve. CONCLUSION A wide variety of complex interventions for adults with limited literacy are able to improve some health-related outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS This review supports the wider introduction of interventions for people with limited literacy, particularly within an evaluation context.

Mental health-related stigma in health care and mental health-care settings

This Review considers the evidence for mental-health-related stigma in health-care and mental-health-care settings. Do mental-health-care and other health-care professionals stigmatise people using their services? If so, what are the effects on quality of mental and physical health care? How can stigma and discrimination in the context of health care be reduced? We show that the contact mental-health-care professionals have with people with mental illness is associated with positive attitudes about civil rights, but does not reduce stigma as does social contact such as with friends or family members with mental illness. Some evidence suggests educational interventions are effective in decreasing stigma especially for general health-care professionals with little or no formal mental health training. Intervention studies are needed to underpin policy; for instance, to decrease disparity in mortality associated with poor access to physical health care for people with mental illness compared with people without mental illness.

The economic impact of mental health stigma and discrimination: A systematic review

UNLABELLED People with mental illness face stigma and discrimination in a variety of settings which can have an economic impact. AIM The aim of this paper was to identify literature on the economic impact of mental illness stigma. METHODS A systematic review of the literature identified 30 papers from 27 studies by searching electronic databases and hand searching reference lists. RESULTS Mental illness stigma/discrimination was found to impact negatively on employment, income, public views about resource allocation and healthcare costs. CONCLUSIONS Stigma and discrimination regarding mental health problems lead to adverse economic effects for people with these conditions. Interventions that reduce stigma may therefore also be economically beneficial.

Filmed v. live social contact interventions to reduce stigma: randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Direct social contact interventions are known to reduce mental health stigma. Filmed social contact may be equally effective and have practical and cost advantages. AIMS To compare the effectiveness of a DVD, a live intervention and a lecture control, in reducing stigma, testing the hypotheses that: (a) DVD and live interventions will be equally effective; and (b) the interventions with social contact (DVD/live) will be more effective than the lecture. Cost-effectiveness, process and acceptability are also assessed. METHOD Student nurses were randomised to: (a) watch a DVD of service users/informal carers talking about their experiences, (b) watch a similar live presentation, or (c) attend a lecture. Primary outcomes were changes in attitudes (using the Mental Illness: Clinicians Attitudes Scale, MICA), emotional reactions (using the Emotional Reactions to Mental Illness Scale, ERMIS), intended proximity (using the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale, RIBS), and knowledge (using the Social Contact Intended Learning Outcomes, SCILO), immediately after the intervention and at 4-month follow-up. RESULTS For the 216 participants, there were no differences between the DVD and live groups on MICA, ERMIS or RIBS scores. The DVD group had higher SCILO (knowledge) scores. The combined social contact group (DVD/live) had better MICA and RIBS scores than the lecture group, the latter difference maintained at 4 months. The DVD was the most cost-effective of the interventions, and the live session the most popular. CONCLUSIONS Our hypotheses were confirmed. This study supports the wider use of filmed social contact interventions to reduce stigma about mental illness.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Discrimination and Stigma Scale (DISC)

Mental illness is associated with unfair treatment in a number of areas of life. There is currently no psychometrically validated measure that has been developed to specifically focus on such experienced discrimination. This study aimed to finalise the Discrimination and Stigma Scale (DISC) and establish its psychometric properties. The DISC was further developed using (1) service user and interviewer focus groups; (2) reading ease testing; and (3) cognitive debriefing interviews. The revised scale then underwent psychometric testing to establish the following properties: reliability; validity; precision; acceptability; and feasibility. The final 22-item DISC demonstrated good psychometric properties (n=86) including inter-rater reliability (weighted kappa range: 0.62-0.95), internal consistency (α=0.78) and test-retest reliability (n=46) (weighted kappa range: 0.56-0.89). Feasibility, validity and acceptability were also established. In conclusion, the 22-item DISC is recommended for use in measuring experienced stigma and discrimination. Additional work to develop a measure of anticipated stigma is recommended.