ABSTRACT
AIMS: To explore: a) the burden of care, and the professional and social support in relatives of patients with bipolar disorders; b) the psychosocial interventions provided to patients and their families by Italian mental health centres. METHODS: 342 outpatients with a bipolar disorder and their key-relatives were randomly recruited in 26 Italian mental health centres, randomly selected and stratified by geographical area and population density. Family burden was explored in relation to: a) patient's clinical status and disability; b) relatives' social and professional support; c) interventions received by patients and their families; d) geographical area. RESULTS: In the previous two months, global functioning was moderately impaired in 36% of the patients, and severely impaired in 34% of them. Twenty-one percent of patients attended a rehabilitative programme, and 3% of their families received a psychoeducational intervention. Burden was higher when patient's symptoms and disability were more severe, the relatives had poorer psychological support and help in emergencies by the social network, and the family lived in Southern Italy. Differences in family burden in relation to geographical area disappeared when psychosocial interventions were provided. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the need to increase the availability of rehabilitative interventions for patients with bipolar disorders and of psychological support for their families, especially in Southern Italy.
Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder , Cost of Illness , Family Health , Bipolar Disorder/therapy , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study explored the effectiveness of a psychoeducational family intervention for schizophrenia on patients' clinical status and disability and relatives' burden and perceived support. METHODS: The study has been carried out in 17 mental health centres. In each of them, 2 professionals were trained in a psychoeducational intervention and applied it for six months with families of users with schizophrenia. At baseline and six months later, patients' clinical status and disability, and relatives' burden, social network and professional support were assessed by validated tools. RESULTS: Of the seventy-one recruited families, 48 (68%) completed the intervention. At six months, a significant improvement was found in patients' clinical status and social functioning, as well as in relatives' burden and social and professional support. In particular, the percentage of patients with poor or very poor global social functioning dropped from 50% to 27% at six months. Forty percent of patients and 45% of relatives reported a significant improvement in their social contacts over the intervention period. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study confirm the hypothesis that psychoeducational family interventions may have a significant effect on social outcome and family burden in schizophrenia when provided in routine conditions.
Subject(s)
Cost of Illness , Family Therapy/methods , Family/psychology , Health Education , Mental Health , Resource Allocation/economics , Schizophrenia/economics , Schizophrenia/therapy , Social Behavior , Catchment Area, Health , Demography , Disability Evaluation , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Schizophrenia/epidemiology , Severity of Illness Index , Social SupportABSTRACT
AIMS: This study aims to explore: a) the feasibility of psycho-educational interventions for families of users with schizophrenia in clinical practice by trained staff; b) the benefits and problems encountered by professionals in the use of these interventions. METHODS: 46 professionals from 23 Italian Mental Health Services (MHS) attended at a three-module training course in psycho-educational interventions and four supervisions in the subsequent year. Following the course, participants provided the intervention to families of users with schizophrenia. The difficulties and benefits encountered by trainees to use the intervention were registered on the Famnily Intervention Schedule. RESULTS: 83% of the participants completed the training course. Following the course, the intervention started in 71 families from 17 MHS. 76% of trainees provided the intervention to 2-5 families, while 13% of them only held informative sessions on schizophrenia. During the supervision period, the organisational difficulties experienced by the professionals were stable, while the benefits increased. Differences in benefits and difficulties were detected in relation to the trainees' experience and professional roles. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to introduce psycho-educational interventions in MHS after a relatively brief period of training and supervision of the staff. Organisational difficulties need to be addressed to increase the dissemination of these interventions on a large scale.
