Jorm A F, Korten A E, Jacomb P A, Rodgers B, Pollitt P
NHMRC Psychiatric Epidemiology Research Center, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1997 Dec;31(6):844-51. doi: 10.3109/00048679709065510.
The aim of this study was to assess health professionals' beliefs about the helpfulness of a broad range of possible interventions for mental disorders.
The study involved a postal survey of 872 general practitioners (GPs), 1128 psychiatrists and 454 clinical psychologists. These health practitioners were presented with a vignette describing either a person with schizophrenia or one with depression. The vignettes were taken from an earlier survey of the general public. Respondents were asked to rate the likely helpfulness of various types of professional and non-professional help and of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.
Two-thirds or more of each profession agreed that the person with schizophrenia would be helped by GPs, psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, antipsychotic agents and admission to a psychiatric ward. Similarly, two-thirds agreed that the person with depression would be helped by GPs, psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, antidepressants, counselling and cognitive-behavioural therapy. However, there were also areas of disagreement. Psychiatrists were less likely than GPs and clinical psychologists to rate psychological and lifestyle interventions as helpful, while clinical psychologists were less likely to rate specifically medical interventions as helpful. Younger members of the professional groups and female members (who also tended to be younger) tended to rate a wider range of interventions for each disorder as likely to be helpful.
Despite areas of broad agreement about treatment, health practitioners were more likely to endorse the interventions associated with their own profession. However, younger members of each profession tended take a broader view. If these age differences represent a cohort effect, health professionals may in the future show greater acceptance of the helpfulness of interventions offered outside their profession. These conclusions are limited by the methodology of the survey, which involved a questionnaire designed for the public rather than professionals.
本研究旨在评估卫生专业人员对于一系列可能用于治疗精神障碍的干预措施有效性的看法。
该研究通过邮寄调查问卷的方式，对872名全科医生、1128名精神科医生和454名临床心理学家进行了调查。这些卫生从业人员收到了一份描述精神分裂症患者或抑郁症患者的病例 vignette（病例 vignette 取自早期一项针对普通公众的调查）。受访者被要求对各类专业和非专业帮助以及药物和非药物干预措施的可能有效性进行评分。
每个专业领域三分之二或更多的人认为，精神分裂症患者会从全科医生、精神科医生、临床心理学家、抗精神病药物以及入住精神科病房中得到帮助。同样，三分之二的人认为，抑郁症患者会从全科医生、精神科医生、临床心理学家、抗抑郁药物、咨询以及认知行为疗法中得到帮助。然而，也存在一些分歧领域。与全科医生和临床心理学家相比，精神科医生将心理和生活方式干预措施评为有效的可能性较低，而临床心理学家将特定医疗干预措施评为有效的可能性较低。专业群体中的年轻成员以及女性成员（她们往往也更年轻）倾向于认为针对每种疾病的更多干预措施可能会有帮助。
尽管在治疗方面存在广泛的共识领域，但卫生从业人员更倾向于认可与其自身专业相关的干预措施。然而，每个专业领域的年轻成员往往持有更广泛的观点。如果这些年龄差异代表了队列效应，那么未来卫生专业人员可能会对其专业之外提供的干预措施的有效性表现出更大的接受度。这些结论受到调查方法的限制，该调查涉及一份为公众而非专业人员设计的问卷。
Zotero 插件