Community-based mental health services in Brazil.

Introduction: The shift from the hospital-based model of care to community-based mental health services began three decades ago and is still an ongoing process in Brazil. Objectives: To update data on the development of the community mental health services network in Brazil in relation to service availability and structure, manpower, pattern of service use, financing, epidemiological studies and the burden of mental disorders, research and national mental health policy. Methods: Searches were constructed to collect data on indexed databases (Medline, Scielo), as well as governmental,NGOs and medical council sources, reports and the grey literature up until 30th March, 2019. Results: Community mental health services are unevenly distributed in the country. Brazil leads the world in terms of the prevalence of anxiety disorders, ranking fifth for depression prevalence. Violence and suicide rates are two growing factors which exacerbate the prevalence of mental disorders prevalence. An increased reduction of the number of psychiatric beds in the country, in addition to the unbalanced growth of services in the community, has resulted in treatment gaps and the underutilization of services and barriers to treating people with the most severe psychosis. Investment in mental healthcare is still scarce. However, mental health funding is not addressed according to the population´s needs and scientific evidence, resulting in a waste of resources and inefficiency. Programmes and service interruptions are common according to each government mandate. Conclusion: Successive changes in ideological perspectives have led to the introduction of policies which have caused fragmentation in the mental health system and services. A lack of evaluation and transparency of services and costs are the main barriers to integrating multiple services and planning long-term developmental phases.

The Adaption of the Client Sociodemographic and Service Receipt Inventory for Costing Mental Health Services in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of tested instruments for measuring mental health services and costs. The Client Sociodemographic Service Receipt Inventory (CSSRI) is the most used tool in economic evaluation in mental health in Europe; it was translated into five languages, and it was mainly used to evaluate deinstitutionalisation process in mental health system reform. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To translate and adapt to the Brazilian healthcare system, and to test its inter-rater reliability, validity and its feasibility in a deinstitutionalized sample of psychiatric hospital living in residential facilities. METHOD: The translation and adaptation of CSSRI to Brazilian context was done by a focus group with eight experts on public mental health services, covering all the available Brazilian healthcare services. Decisions on the extent of conceptual overlap between British and Brazilian version were discussed until reaching expert consensus. The inter-rater reliability and applicability of this version, called ``Inventário Sociodemográfico de Uso e Custos de Serviços - ISDUCS'', was tested in a sample of 30 subjects with moderate to severe mental disorders living in residential facilities. Because the lack of medical record or another source, ISDUCS's validity was assessed using Kappa coefficient agreement to compare between resident`s answers and their professional carers`answers. RESULTS: The same structure of the original instrument was kept, with an additional list of items for costing consumable services. The main modifications were on items related to education, occupational status and on detailed descriptions of public health services. The agreement between two mental health raters was good to excellent for the majority of items, with Kappa coefficient ranged from 0.6 to 1.0. Because 43% of the sample was unable to answer questions about regularly taken medications and consultations with health professionals, an exploratory analysis was done to identify potentially related variables. Greater severity of psychiatric symptoms and lower independent living skills were related to the inability to answer these questions. Agreement between residents and carers was good to excellent for socio and demographic variables, living situation and occupational status, income, visits to a psychologist, occupational therapists and social workers. CONCLUSION: ISDUCS is the first tool for economic evaluation including mental health services translated and adapted to Brazilian context. Despite the widespread use of CRSSI among people with schizophrenia in Europe, this study found that greater severity of symptoms led to high rate of missing responses. Inter-rater reliability was excellent as a whole. Small sample size didn't allow generalisation of results of this preliminary testing. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH PROVISION AND USE: ISDUCS may be suitable for people with mental illness but requires additional sources of information such as carers and medical records. ISDUCS could be used for monitoring health service use in general practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Despite some limitations, this instrument was used to measure mental health service costs in three Brazilian studies, generating data for supporting local mental health policies, for boosting empirical research in the country and for supporting modelling studies. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: It should be tested further in other health settings and samples.

The impact of antipsychotic polytherapy costs in the public health care in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines for the treatment of psychoses recommend antipsychotic monotherapy. However, the rate of antipsychotic polytherapy has increased over the last decade, reaching up to 60% in some settings. Studies evaluating the costs and impact of antipsychotic polytherapy in the health system are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the costs of antipsychotic polytherapy and its impact on public health costs in a sample of subjects with psychotic disorders living in residential facilities in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil. METHOD: A cross-sectional study that used a bottom-up approach for collecting costs data in a public health provider's perspective. Subjects with psychosis living in 20 fully-staffed residential facilities in the city of Sao Paulo were assessed for clinical and psychosocial profile, severity of symptoms, quality of life, use of health services and pharmacological treatment. The impact of polytherapy on total direct costs was evaluated. RESULTS: 147 subjects were included, 134 used antipsychotics regularly and 38% were in use of antipsychotic polytherapy. There were no significant differences in clinical and psychosocial characteristics between polytherapy and monotherapy groups. Four variables explained 30% of direct costs: the number of antipsychotics, location of the residential facility, time living in the facility and use of olanzapine. The costs of antipsychotics corresponded to 94.4% of the total psychotropic costs and to 49.5% of all health services use when excluding accommodation costs. Olanzapine costs corresponded to 51% of all psychotropic costs. CONCLUSION: Antipsychotic polytherapy is a huge economic burden to public health service, despite the lack of evidence supporting this practice. Great variations on antipsychotic costs explicit the need of establishing protocols for rational antipsychotic prescriptions and consequently optimising resource allocation. Cost-effectiveness studies are necessary to estimate the best value for money among antipsychotics, especially in low and middle income countries.