Continuing stigmatisation by psychiatrists

Training community mental health staff in Guangzhou, China: evaluation of the effect of a new training model

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of people with mental disorders receive services at primary care in China. The aims of this study are to evaluate impact of a new training course and supervision for community mental health staff to enhance their levels of mental health knowledge and to reduce their stigmatization toward people with mental illness.

METHODS

A total of 77 community mental health staff from eight regions in Guangzhou in China were recruited for the study.4 regions were randomly allocated to the new training model group, and 4 to the old training model group. Levels of mental health knowledge were measured by purpose-made assessment schedule and by the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS). Stigma was evaluated by the Mental Illness: Clinicians' Attitudes Scale (MICA) and the Reported and Intended Behavior Scale (RIBS). Evaluation questionnaires were given at the beginning of course, at the end, and at 6 month and at 12 month follow-up.

RESULTS

After the training period, the 6-month, and the 12-month, knowledge scores of the intervention group were higher than the control group. At 6-month and 12-month follow-up, means scores of MAKS of the intervention group increased more than the control group (both p < 0.05) when age, sex, marriage status, title and time were controlled for. At 6-month follow-up, means scores of MICA of the intervention group decreased more than that of the control group (p < 0.01). At after-training, at 6-months, and at 12-months, mean scores of RIBS of the intervention group increased more than the control (p < 0.01, p < 0.001, p < 0.001) when age, sex, marriage status, title and time were controlled for.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the traditional training course and supervision, the new course improved community mental health staff knowledge of mental disorders, improving their attitudes toward people with mental disorder, and increasing their willingness to have contact with people with mental disorder.

Mental health training program for community mental health staff in Guangzhou, China: effects on knowledge of mental illness and stigma

BACKGROUND

In order to reduce the huge treatment gap in mental health, WHO has called for integrating mental health into primary care. The purposes of this study are to provide a training course to improve the community mental health staff's knowledge of mental health and reduce stigma related to mental illness, as well as to evaluate the impact of this training on knowledge and stigma.

METHODS

The training intervention was a one day course for community mental health staff in Guangzhou, China. Evaluation questionnaires were given before and after the training session. Mental health knowledge was assessed using two vignettes. Stigma was evaluated by the Mental Illness: Clinicians' Attitudes Scale (MICA) and the Reported and Intended Behavior Scale (RIBS).

RESULTS

A total of 99 community mental health staff from eight regions in Guangzhou, China were recruited for the study. The training course did not lead to a significant improvement of participants' levels of mental health knowledge. The mean score of MICA decreased from 47.92 ± 8.63 to 43.53 ± 9.61 after the training (t = 6.64, P < 0.001). As for the RIBS, the mean scores increased from (14.12 ± 3.90) to (15.38 ± 3.41) at post-test (t = -5.44, P < 0.001), indicating a significant improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study show that the training course is an effective way to improve community mental health staff's attitudes toward people with mental illness in the short term, as well as to lessen the social distance between staff and people with mental illness.

Levels of stigma among community mental health staff in Guangzhou, China

BACKGROUND

Stigma and discrimination are widely experienced by people with mental illness, even in healthcare settings. The purposes of this study were to assess mental health stigma among community mental health staff in Guangzhou, China and in doing so also to assess the psychometric properties of the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS) - Chinese version.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was undertaken among 214 community mental health staff in Guangzhou from September to November, 2013. The Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS) and RIBS were administered together with the Mental Illness: Clinicians' Attitudes Scale (MICA) to evaluate staff stigma from the perspective of knowledge, attitudes and behaviour.

RESULTS

The total scores of RIBS, MAKS and MICA were (11.97 ± 3.41), (16.80 ± 5.39) and (51.69 ± 6.94) respectively. Female staff members were more willing to contact people with mental illness than males (t(212) = -2.85,P = 0.005) and had more knowledge about mental illness (t(212) = -2.28,P = 0.024). The Chinese version of RIBS had good internal consistency (alpha = 0.82), test-retest reliability (r = 0.68,P < 0.001) and adequate convergent validity, as indicated by a significant negative correlation with the Chinese version of MICA(r = -0.43, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show relatively high levels of stigma toward people with mental illness among community mental health staff in Guangzhou, China. There are slightly gender differences in discriminatory behaviours and stigma related knowledge of mental illness among community mental health staff, with female staff in general less stigmatising. Accordingly, anti-stigma programmes should be established among healthcare staff. In addition, the Chinese version of RIBS is a reliable, valid and acceptable measure which can be used to assess the willingness of participants to contact people with mental illness in future anti-stigma campaigns.

Stigma and mental health professionals: a review of the evidence on an intricate relationship

In the past decade, mental health professionals have initiated a number of national and international efforts against the stigma of mental illness. While largely successful in beating stigma and discrimination, these programmes have, in part, been criticized to be largely uninformed by the lived realities of people with mental illness and their families. Some critics claimed that anti-stigma efforts led by mental health professionals were in fact a concealed attempt at de-stigmatizing psychiatry itself as a profession. This paper will attempt to throw light on the various ways in which mental health professionals are 'entangled' in anti-stigma activities. It will outline the complex relationships between stigma and the psychiatric profession, presenting evidence on how its members can simultaneously be stigmatizers, stigma recipients and powerful agents of de-stigmatization. In exploring the role of mental health professionals as targets of stigma, new findings will be presented on the role of stigma as a professional stressor in psychiatry. Conclusions will be drawn on how the pursuit of professional self-interest can be a legitimate goal of anti-stigma programmes. Further, ways in which acknowledging psychiatry's own agenda can contribute to both credibility and success of fighting stigma from within psychiatry will be discussed.

Borderline personality disorder, stigma, and treatment implications

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is often viewed in negative terms by mental health practitioners and the public. The disorder may have a stigma associated with it that goes beyond those associated with other mental illnesses. The stigma associated with BPD may affect how practitioners tolerate the actions, thoughts, and emotional reactions of these individuals. It may also lead to minimizing symptoms and overlooking strengths. In society, people tend to distance themselves from stigmatized populations, and there is evidence that some clinicians may emotionally distance themselves from individuals with BPD. This distancing may be especially problematic in treating patients with BPD; in addition to being unusually sensitive to rejection and abandonment, they may react negatively (e.g., by harming themselves or withdrawing from treatment) if they perceive such distancing and rejection. Clinicians' reactivity may be self-protective in response to actual behavior associated with the pathology. As a consequence, however, the very behaviors that make it difficult to work with these individuals contribute to the stigma of BPD. In a dialectical relationship, that stigma can influence the clinician's reactivity, thereby exacerbating those same negative behaviors. The result is a self-fulfilling prophecy and a cycle of stigmatization to which both patient and therapist contribute. The extent to which therapist distancing is influenced by stigma is an important question that highlights the possibility that the stigma associated with BPD can have an independent contribution to poor outcome with this population. A final issue concerns the available means for identifying and limiting the impact of stigmatization on the treatment of individuals with BPD.

The differential effectiveness of psychosocial and biogenetic causal explanations in reducing negative attitudes toward "mental illness"

Given the apparent failure of the "mental illness is an illness like any other" approach to reducing negative stereotypes of people with mental health problems, the differential effects of biogenetic and psychosocial explanations of psychiatric symptoms were evaluated. Attitude measures were administered to young New Zealand adults before and after a video portraying a young man with psychotic symptoms followed by either biogenetic or psychosocial explanations. Consistent with previous studies, the "medical model" approach significantly increased perceptions of dangerousness and unpredictability. Following the psychosocial explanation there was a slight but statistically insignificant improvement in attitudes. Participants who knew users of psychiatric services, or who had used services themselves, had more positive attitudes than other participants. It is recommended that destigmatization programs minimize efforts to persuade the public that mental health problems are biogenetic illnesses, and focus instead on increasing exposure to users of mental health services. Further research is required to determine whether such exposure should include life histories, so as to highlight the psychosocial causes of mental health problems.