Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Indian J Psychiatry ; 59(2): 149-156, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28827860

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Estimates of psychiatric morbidity in the community will help service development. Participation of trained nonspecialist health-care providers will facilitate scaling up of services in resource-limited settings. AIMS: This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of priority mental health problems in populations served by the District Mental Health Program (DMHP). SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This is a population-based cross-sectional survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We did stratified cluster sampling of households in five districts of Kerala. Trained Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs) identified people who had symptoms suggestive of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Clinicians evaluated the information collected by the ASHAs and designated individuals as probable cases of psychosis or noncases. Screening instruments such as General Health Questionnaire-12, CAGE questionnaire, and Everyday Abilities Scale for India were used for identifying common mental disorders (CMDs), clinically significant alcohol-related problems, and functional impairment. RESULTS: We found 12.43% of the adult population affected by mental health conditions. We found CMD as most common with a prevalence of 9%. The prevalence of psychosis was 0.71%, clinically significant alcohol-related problems was 1.46%, and dementia and other cognitive impairments was 1.26%. We found informant-based case finding to be useful in the identification of psychosis. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health problems are common. Nonspecialist health-care providers can be trained to identify psychiatric morbidity in the community. Their participation will help in narrowing the treatment gap. Embedding operational research to DMHP will make scaling up more efficient.

2.
Indian J Psychiatry ; 57(4): 392-6, 2015.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26813699

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Several studies have revealed significant differences between bipolar (BP) and unipolar depression (UP). Misdiagnosing BP depression results in suboptimal symptom resolution, induction of manic switch, mixed state, or accelerated cycling. This study compares various psycho-socio-demographic, longitudinal course, and phenomenological factors associated with BP and UP depression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared 30 UP and 30 BP depression patients using a specially designed intake proforma, International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnostic criteria for research, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-21 (HAMD-21), Hypomania Checklist-32 Questionnaire (HCL-32), Brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS), and Kuppuswami's socioeconomic status scale. RESULTS: BP depression group consisted of mostly males, with earlier age of onset of illness, longer illness duration, frequent episodes, hospitalizations and psychotic symptoms. The total HAM-D score and 4 HAM-D item scores-psychomotor retardation, insight, diurnal variation of symptoms and its severity, and paranoid symptoms were significantly higher in this group. Binary logistic regression identified the age of onset, the total duration of illness, frequency of affective episodes, and presence of delusions as predictors of bipolarity (odds ratio = 1.327; 1.517; 0.062; 0.137). CONCLUSIONS: Identification of clinical markers of bipolarity from large scale prospective studies is needed.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...