An Instrument to Measure Mental Health Professionals&amp;rsquo; Beliefs and Attitudes towards Service Users&amp;rsquo; Rights

This Special Issue deals with the topic of how people and social groups face problems in an increasingly complex and globalized society. The topics included in the call for papers were the interaction of psychosocial well-being and mental health with economic, gender, racial and ethnic inequalities, migration and demographic change and conflict and war, as well as the effects of stigma on people discriminated against because of their differential characteristics, whether they are of a sexual, disability or other minority. We made this proposal because we believed that, despite the introduction of the biopsychosocial model in the late 1970s as a paradigm of the integration of different disciplinary views, research in mental health and psychosocial well-being is still highly fragmented. For decades, we have tried to advance by emphasizing a part of the equation, with results that are at least modest. Therefore, in this Special Issue, we prioritized works aiming at disciplinary and methodological integration. The Special Issue was open to any subject area related to the impacts of social issues on mental health and psychosocial well-being. We were interested in empirical and theoretical enquiries at all ecological levels, from the psychosocial impact of social dynamics on individuals, to the analysis of how sociocultural and geopolitical factors influence health and collective psychosocial well-being.

Understanding Psychosocial Wellbeing in the Context of Complex and Multidimensional Problems

Eiroá-Orosa

2020

Efficacy of an Intervention to Reduce Stigma Beliefs and Attitudes among Primary Care and Mental Health Professionals: Two Cluster Randomised-Controlled Trials

Eiroá-Orosa

Lomascolo²,

Tosas-Fernández³

2021

Although it may seem paradoxical, primary care and mental health professionals develop prejudices and discriminatory attitudes towards people with mental health problems in a very similar way to the rest of the population. The main objective of this project was to design, implement and evaluate two awareness-raising interventions respectively tailored to reduce stigmatising beliefs and attitudes towards persons with a mental health diagnosis among primary care (PC) and mental health (MH) professionals. These interventions were developed by Obertament, the Catalan alliance against stigma and discrimination in mental health. Activists from this organisation with lived experience of mental health diagnosis carried out awareness-raising interventions in PC and MH health centres. The Targeted, Local, Credible, Continuous Contact (TLC3) methodology was adapted to the Catalan healthcare context. The efficacy of these interventions was evaluated using two prospective double-blind cluster-randomised-controlled trials. Stigmatizing beliefs and behaviours were measured with the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers in PC centres and with the Beliefs and Attitudes towards Mental Health Service users’ rights in MH centres. Reductions in both PC and MH professionals’ stigmatising beliefs and attitudes were found in the 1-month follow-up, although a ‘rebound effect’ at the 3-month follow up was detected. This emphasizes the importance of the continuity of the presence of anti-stigma activities and messages. Attrition rates were high, which can hamper the reliability of the results. Further follow-up studies should enquiry effects of long-term interventions aimed at reducing stigmatising beliefs and attitudes among primary care and mental health professionals using assessment systems that include the measurement of knowledge acquired and actual behavioural change.

Mental Health Clinician Attitudes about Service User and Family Agency and Involvement in Recovery-Oriented Practice

Chisholm,

Hope,

Fossey

et al. 2023

Background: Recovery-oriented practice (ROP) is a framework focusing on recovery through hope, choice, and meaning, to live with or without enduring symptoms and challenges. Aims: To examine clinicians’ attitudes about the involvement of service users and family or supporters in ROP. Methods: A bespoke Qualtrics survey obtained views of mental health clinicians working in an Australian public mental health service about service user and family involvement in ROP, using a five-point Likert scale of agreement and free-text responses. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics and content analysis methods. Results: Two hundred and three clinicians completed the survey. Most (79%) clinicians agreed with the statement that service users want clinicians to use ROP principles, and the majority (63%) also ‘strongly believed’ that ROP made a difference to service users’ mental health outcomes. Only 15% ‘strongly agreed’ and 57% somewhat agreed with the statement that service users know what treatment is best for them, and only 20% of clinicians ‘strongly agreed’ that supporters of service users believed in and wanted ROP for their family member or friend. Future directions: This study adds to the literature on clinicians’ views about ROP and shows that although clinicians are supportive of ROP, they also express substantial ambivalence about whether service users and families know what treatment is best. For ROP implementation to be successful, workforce training needs to support clinicians to reflect on these views with service users and families, and to encourage supported decision making. Future studies should focus on changes in clinicians’ views and practice post ROP training.