Department of Psychology, University of Michigan.
Psychol Serv. 2018 Feb;15(1):1-10. doi: 10.1037/ser0000160. Epub 2017 May 11.
The federal Indian Health Service (IHS) is the primary funding source for health services designated for American Indians (AIs; Gone & Trimble, 2012). Urban Indian health organizations (UIHOs), funded in part by IHS, are typically the only sites in large metropolitan settings offering treatments tailored to AI health needs. This is a first look at how mental health treatment is structured at UIHOs. UIHO staff at 17 of 34 UIHOs responded to our request to participate (50%), 14 employed behavioral health program directors who could complete the survey on behalf of their programs, and 11 of these submitted complete data regarding their current treatment practices and personal attitudes toward empirically supported treatments. Reported treatment profiles differed less than expected from available data on national outpatient clinics from the National Mental Health Services Survey (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], 2014), and program director attitudes toward empirically supported treatments were similar to national norms reported by Aarons et al. (2010). One way in which treatment differed was in the reported use of traditional AI healing services. All program directors indicated that traditional AI healing services were available within their behavioral health programs in some form. These findings seem promising for the development of new empirically supported treatments for AI clients, but also raise concerns, given what is known about AI treatment preferences and mental health disparities. For example, traditional healing services are often considered "alternative medicine," outside the purview of evidence-based practice as typically construed by mental health services researchers. This potential conflict is a subject for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record
美国联邦印第安人健康服务局(IHS)是为美国印第安人(AI;Gone 和 Trimble,2012)指定的卫生服务提供主要资金来源。部分由 IHS 资助的城市印第安人健康组织(UIHO)通常是在大型都市环境中提供针对 AI 健康需求的治疗的唯一场所。这是首次了解 UIHO 如何构建心理健康治疗。在 34 个 UIHO 中的 17 个响应了我们参与的请求(50%),其中 14 个雇用了行为健康项目主任,他们可以代表其项目完成调查,其中 11 个提供了关于其当前治疗实践和个人对循证治疗态度的完整数据。报告的治疗情况与国家心理健康服务调查(物质滥用和心理健康服务管理局 [SAMHSA],2014 年)中全国门诊诊所的可用数据相比,差异小于预期,并且项目主任对循证治疗的态度与 Aarons 等人报告的全国规范相似。治疗方法不同的一种方式是在报告的传统 AI 治疗服务的使用上。所有项目主任都表示,传统的 AI 治疗服务在其行为健康计划中以某种形式提供。这些发现似乎为为 AI 客户开发新的循证治疗方法带来了希望,但也引起了关注,因为人们了解 AI 治疗偏好和心理健康差异。例如,传统的治疗服务通常被视为“替代医学”,超出了心理健康服务研究人员通常理解的循证实践的范围。这种潜在的冲突是未来研究的主题。