Policy Definitions for "Serious Mental Illness" Across 56 United States, Districts and Territories

The construct "serious/severe mental illness," or "SMI," is a priority within mental health initiatives in the United States. However, there is a lack of clarity regarding its operational definition in policy and practice settings. This study involved an evaluation of "SMI" policy definitions across the 50 United States, five territories, and Washington, D.C. via review of public legislation, department of health (DOH) websites and contacts. Policy definitions were available for 46 (82.2%) locations. Of those definitions, 32 (69.6%) were listed within legislation and 18 (39.1%) used pre-existing organizational or agency definitions. Only nine (19.6%) definitions indicated they were intended to determine eligibility for specific mental health services. Most locations (N = 38; 82.6%) mentioned functional impairment or disability as an eligibility criterion and suggested any psychiatric diagnosis could be considered SMI (N = 34; 73.9%). Results indicate substantial variability in SMI policy definitions across geographic locations with implications for service eligibility, delivery, and receipt.

What stops Korean immigrants from accessing child and adolescent mental health services?

BACKGROUND

Access to child and adolescent mental health services by ethnic minorities has been poorly studied. Despite rapid growth of the immigrant Korean population, evidence indicates that few Korean families utilise these services in New Zealand. Those that do tend to present late and with significant morbidity. We sought to understand barriers to service access from Korean parents' perspectives.

METHOD

Seven focus groups were undertaken with 31 Korean parents of children aged 18 and under. The focus groups were semi-structured, held in the Korean language and utilised two case scenarios of common childhood/adolescent mental illnesses around which a set of broad, open-ended questions were posed. All conversations were audiorecorded, transcribed and translated into English. Thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo software.

RESULTS

Both attitudinal and structural barriers were identified. Attitudinal barriers included attribution of mental illness to external stressors or parenting problems, social stigma, denial or normalization of children's behaviour, fear of family disempowerment, and mistrust of public mental health services. Structural barriers included parents' lack of information regarding available services, logistical difficulties in access, communication difficulties, concerns over the quality of translators, and cultural competence of service providers.

CONCLUSION

Significant barriers prevent Korean immigrant families from accessing child and adolescent mental health services in New Zealand. Measures to improve access, for example by countering stigma, are urgently required.

Health Care Access and Quality Among Children Exposed to Adversity: Implications for Universal Screening of Adverse Childhood Experiences

OBJECTIVES

 Given recent advances toward universal screening for Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), our objective was to investigate whether children with higher ACEs experience poorer quality of provider care and greater challenges accessing needed mental health treatment.

METHODS

This study uses a nationally representative sample of US children aged 0-17 years drawn from the National Survey on Children's Health for 2016-2019. Caregivers and parents completed surveys between June 2016 and February 2020 (N = 131,774). Logistic regression models adjusting for identified covariates were used to test associations between a child's number of ACEs, their quality of provider care, and their access to mental health treatment. All analyses used appropriate survey weighting commands.

RESULTS

High ACEs (4 or more) were associated with lower quality of provider care, including effective care coordination [OR 0.45, 95% CI (0.38, 0.52)], family-centered care [OR 0.49, 95% CI (0.41, 0.58)], shared decision making [OR 0.50, 95% CI (0.39, 0.85)], and referrals for care [OR 0.58, 95% CI (0.43, 0.80)]; children with high ACEs were also less likely to have a medical home [OR 0.66, 95% CI (0.57, 0.76)]. High ACEs were also significantly associated with greater difficulty accessing mental health treatment [OR 0.55, 95% CI (0.43, 0.70)]. Similar results were found for children in the moderate ACE (2-3) and low ACE (1) groups.

CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE

Findings indicate that greater ACEs were associated with poorer quality medical care and greater difficulty accessing needed mental health treatment. Because findings indicate that children with high ACEs may be the least likely to receive quality care or necessary mental health treatment to address this adversity, universal screening for ACEs should be considered with caution.

Inequities in access to depression treatment: results of the Brazilian National Health Survey - PNS

Background

Despite depression being one of the most prevalent mental disorders in the world, access to treatment is still insufficient, especially in low- and middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to investigate differences in access to treatment for depression according to socio-demographic characteristics, geographical area and multi-morbidity in a nationally representative sample of individuals with depression.

Methods

This study analyses data from the National Health Survey (Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde – PNS), a Brazilian household-based nationwide survey, which comprises 60,202 adults (aged 18 years or older). Depression was evaluated through the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Prevalence Ratios and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated using Poisson regression.

Results

The general prevalence of depression was 7.9 % (95 % CI 7.5 to 8.3). Among those with depression, 78.8 % did not receive any treatment, and 14.1 % received only pharmacotherapy. Multivariable analyses showed that being female, white, aged between 30 and 69 years, living in regions other than the North, having higher education and having multi-morbidities were independently associated with higher likelihood of access to any treatment.

Conclusions

Most Brazilians with clinically relevant depressive symptoms are not receiving any treatment. Access to care is unequal, with the poor and those living in low resource areas having higher difficulties to access mental health care. Understanding these disparities is important for the provision of effective interventions aimed at reducing the prevalence of depression and inequities in access to mental health care.