Roberts Jane H
Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of Sunderland, Sunderland, UK.
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2012 Oct;13(4):318-26. doi: 10.1017/S1463423611000582.
Australia and England show high rates of psychological distress and mental health problems in young people. Both are high-income countries and have stated their intention to improve the delivery of health care to young people in primary care settings. Australia has an international reputation for improving care through innovative services and educational initiatives. England has taken a different direction and has concentrated more on developing policy and making recommendations to improve access for young people.
To describe a Churchill Fellowship visit to Australia to observe initiatives in primary care based youth-friendly mental health care and to reflect upon the observations, comparing and contrasting with the English model.
The observations and reflections presented draw on field notes from site visits and meeting with key players, accessing web resources and referring to the literature, both grey and published.
Australia offers plurality in health care delivery and innovative responses to addressing youth mental health. There are two key approaches. The first is the development of services specializing in youth mental health. The second approach is to build capacity of existing primary care services to recognize the particular bio-psychosocial needs of adolescents (and their families). In contrast, England has tended to focus primarily on policy development and improving youth access.
The paper draws attention to a number of political, clinical and educational developments in both Australia and England. Both countries demonstrate different strategies in response to the high levels of psychological distress in young people. Learning from colleagues in other settings can inform our own practice. Ultimately responding to young people's mental health needs is best served by youth-friendly policy which prepares clinicians for effective practice, informed by applied research and supported by adequate resources. Investment in young people's health must be a priority for us all.
澳大利亚和英国的年轻人心理困扰和心理健康问题发生率较高。两国均为高收入国家,并表示有意改善初级保健机构为年轻人提供的医疗服务。澳大利亚在通过创新服务和教育举措改善医疗服务方面享有国际声誉。英国则采取了不同的方向,更多地专注于制定政策并提出建议,以改善年轻人获得医疗服务的机会。
描述一次丘吉尔奖学金访问澳大利亚的经历,观察初级保健机构中针对年轻人的心理健康护理举措,并对观察结果进行反思,与英国模式进行比较和对比。
所呈现的观察结果和反思借鉴了实地考察的笔记、与关键人物的会面、网络资源以及灰色文献和已发表文献。
澳大利亚在医疗服务提供方面具有多样性,并对解决青少年心理健康问题做出了创新性回应。有两种关键方法。第一种是发展专门针对青少年心理健康的服务。第二种方法是增强现有初级保健服务机构的能力,以认识到青少年(及其家庭)特殊的生物心理社会需求。相比之下,英国主要倾向于专注政策制定和改善年轻人获得医疗服务的机会。
本文提请注意澳大利亚和英国在政治、临床和教育方面的一些发展情况。两国在应对年轻人高度的心理困扰方面展示了不同的策略。向其他地区的同行学习可以为我们自己的实践提供参考。最终,制定对年轻人友好的政策,让临床医生在应用研究的指导下并在充足资源的支持下做好有效实践的准备,才能最好地满足年轻人的心理健康需求。对年轻人健康的投资必须成为我们所有人的优先事项。