Aim – The high economic and social costs associated with the ‘common mental disorders’, and the need to scale up appropriate care services, are now widely recognized, but responses vary from country to country. In Britain, a current government initiative to promote psychological therapy is driven both by economic pressures and by research on the factors of happiness, or life-satisfaction. This article provides a short critical review of the project. Method – A health policy analysis, with regard to problem definition; objectives; sources of information; criteria for evaluation; impact on existing services, and comparison with alternative strategies. Results – The new programme, Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT), aims to expand treatment services by training 3,600 ‘psychological therapists’ in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), which they will then apply in the wider community. This service, with an initial budget of £173 million, will provide treatment for depression and chronic anxiety from local centres across the country. The programme is intended to pay for itself by reducing incapacity costs. Closer examination, however, raises questions concerning the project’s theoretical basis, logistics and research methodology, and casts doubt on its advantages over alternative approaches. Conclusions – The IAPT project is ill-designed to achieve its objectives and unsuitable as a model for treatment and care of the common mental disorders in other countries. An alternative strategy, based on closer integration of community mental health and primary health care, should be tested and on previous experience seems likely to prove more cost-effective.

Declaration of Interest: None.

Objective – The aim of the study was to show, trough the calculation of the direct costs of supports and treatments actually provided by a NHS Mental Health Department, the presence of associations between four diagnostic groups (schizophrenia, affective psychosis, paranoia and neurotic disorders) and their overall and items (community care, rehabilitation facilities and in-patients services) costs. Setting – Mental Health Department and CSM “Scalo” (NHS Mental Centre), AUSL “Citta di Bologna”, Emilia-Romagna Region. Design – Yearly direct costs were calculated for a sample (n = 75) of all patients (N = 745) who during 365 days had more than four contacts with CSM and also for four randomised diagnostic groups (n = 30 per group). Main outcome measures – We calculated unit costs of 15 types of services provided by CSM, selected according to the yearly number of services provided and the time spent by each health professional, and the in patient-cost per all days spent in a public or private sector hospital for psychiatric care. Results – The statistic analysis, performed with the help of the Kruskal-Wallis test, showed significantly higher overall costs for the schizophrenic patients than the sample-group and the neurotic disorders-group; besides a significant difference in the item costs for rehabilitation facilities was found between the schizophrenic group and the paranoia, neurotic disorders groups and the sample one, whereas no significant differences in costs of inpatients services and drugs administration were tested between the groups. Conclusions – The results of our study allow to demonstrate that there are cost differences between the diagnosis (direct costs are highest for schizophrenic patients and lowest for those with neurotic disorders) and that the costs evaluation can be used to ensure appropriate provisions to Mental Health Department for support and treatment of a wide range of psychiatric disorders.

Background – Schizophrenia is a complex disease resulting from the interplay of genetic and environmental factors. However, psychiatric genetics and epidemiology have often worked as independent research fields. Aims – To review the evidence about the gene-environment interplay involved in the development of schizophrenia. Methods – Systematic review of medical and psychological databases. Results – On one hand, quantitative and molecular genetics showed high heritability for schizophrenia and identified genes likely to be involved in its pathophysiology. The strength of the association between candidate genes and schizophrenia is however modest, and the need for a more appropriate conceptualization of the genetic risk has been claimed. On the other hand, psychiatric epidemiology described several environmental factors liked with the onset or the course of schizophrenia. The observational nature of epidemiology, however, may hamper inference on causation. Gene-environment correlations and interactions influence the exposure and the vulnerability to the environment, respectively. Current findings suggest that gene-environment correlations and interactions may be common phenomena in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia. The consideration of gene-environment interplay may help to overcome many limitations of genetic and epidemiological studies in psychiatry and suggest innovative preventive and therapeutic strategies. Conclusions – Taking into account the complexity of schizophrenia pathophysiology, mental health genetics may provide a comprehensive and heuristic model of disease.

Declaration of Interest: none.

Abstract

Mainstream psychiatry emphasises controlling symptoms by taking medications. This approach ignores the role of context in shaping illness experiences and how people engage with mental health professionals. The focus on symptom control and medication management also narrows the function of the psychiatrist. This editorial argues that knowledge of patients’ lives is important for providing empathic care that is oriented to the outcomes that matter to patients. In addition, care that attends to the person-in-context motivates and sustains mental health providers by putting meaning back into medicine. Truly patient-centred care demands pushing back against the reductionism of contemporary psychiatry to thoughtfully engage with the complexities of patients’ lives.

The discussion of the achievements and limitations of the strategies prioritised in global mental health that has taken place in recent years contributed to a unified vision for action that addresses the gaps still existing on prevention, treatment, quality of care and human rights protection. This editorial presents four reflections on the impact of this vision on the definition of future priorities, particularly in the areas of policy implementation, services reconfiguration and organisation, human rights and research. It concludes that further debate is needed to redefine the balance between priorities and strategies that can better promote an effective response to the needs of low and middle income countries, and to ensure an efficient coordination of efforts in the future.

This paper is concerned with issues in the routine measurement of quality of life in a mental health context. It is in three parts. In the first part the first author reviews briefly, lessons from a decade of experience in the use of data produced by routine measurement using the Colorado Client Assessment Record (CCAR) in the Mental Health Centre of Boulder County (MHCBC) in Colorado, USA. In the second part, the specific issues surrounding quality of life assessment as a routine outcome measure are considered. Evidence is presented to counter some of the commonly held beliefs about QoL measurement problems. Finally, general problems that affect QoL and all other routine measures are described and analysed using a framework devised by Peterson (1989).

Objective — To review the relevant literature on the effects of reductions in long stay beds on mental health services in the UK. Method — A selective literature review, with particular reference to research conducted by the author and colleagues at The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.Results — The evidence suggests that the effects of long stay bed reductions should be examined with regard to 'old' and 'new' long stay patients separately. While the 'old' long stay who have been most directly effected by these changes have generally fared well; the 'new' long stay have not. They are currently accumulating in acute inpatient units, often on general hospital sites, or are rotating in the 'revolving door' of acute inpatient care and inadequate community supports. Although it is clear that there is a shortage of acute beds especially in inner city areas many of the these beds are currently occupied by patients who would be better (and less expensively) cared for in community alternatives if these were available. The evidence suggests that it is possible to im-prove outcomes for this 'new' long stay group if specific kinds of housing, work and assertive community teams are provided. Conclusions — It is concluded that the effects of long stay bed reductions should be considered in a 'systems perspective'. Effective community services can be established, but in order to achieve effective substitution of one kind of service for another, there must be a well co-ordinated, clearly targeted, and technically efficient system. At the present time such services are rare. However, simply focusing on one element (e.g. beds) is unlikely to produce cost effective and efficient solutions.

Psychostimulants are the first choice medication in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Despite the proven high efficacy of psychostimulants, at least in the short term, for ADHD core symptoms, concerns continue to be raised on their adverse effects, including putative increased risk of substance use disorders (SUDs). A recent multicentre, case–control, longitudinal, prospective, European study by Groenman and colleagues found that treatment with psychostimulants in children with ADHD lowered the risk of SUDs in adolescence. However, this finding is at odds with other recent evidence concluding that ADHD children with and without medication treatment history did not significantly differ on any subsequent SUDs rates. In the present paper, we discuss the study by Groenman and colleagues in view of its methodological strengths and limitations, and we suggest possible implications for day-to-day clinical practice.

The importance of measuring the quality of mental health care is widely recognized. A number of factors should be considered when constructing mental health quality indicators including the aspects of care to be measured; translation of quality measurement concepts into indicators that can be measured; pilot-testing, analysis and display of measures; and maintaining effectiveness of performance measures and policies over time. The impetus to measure quality in mental health care may be dampened by the innumerable challenges inherent in this worthwhile endeavour. In particular, many countries lack adequate quality measurement infrastructure. Challenges may be overcome to a certain extent by international collaboration. While cross-country co-operation can also introduce additional complexities; its benefits usually outweigh the costs. Quality indicators can have many uses but of utmost importance is that quality measurement in mental health care subsequently results in quality improvements.