Resolving the paradox of increased mental health expenditure and stable prevalence

Author:

Meadows Graham N123ORCID,Prodan Ante45,Patten Scott6,Shawyer Frances1,Francis Sarah1,Enticott Joanne17,Rosenberg Sebastian89,Atkinson Jo-An6101112,Fossey Ellie13,Kakuma Ritsuko14

Affiliation:

1. Southern Synergy, Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

2. Adult Mental Health, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

3. Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, VIC, Australia

4. Computing & ICT Organisational Unit, School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

5. Decision Analytics, Sax Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia

6. Department of Community Health Sciences and Psychiatry, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

7. Department of General Practice, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

8. Brain and Mind Centre, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

9. Centre for Mental Health Research, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

10. Menzies Centre for Health Policy, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

11. Simulation for Policy, The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia

12. Translational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

13. Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

14. Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK

Abstract

A doubling of Australian expenditure on mental health services over two decades, inflation-adjusted, has reduced prevalence of neither psychological distress nor mental disorders. Low rates of help-seeking, and inadequate and inequitable delivery of effective care may explain this partially, but not fully. Focusing on depressive disorders, drawing initially on ideas from the work of philosopher and socio-cultural critic Ivan Illich, we use evidence-based medicine statistics and simulation modelling approaches to develop testable hypotheses as to how iatrogenic influences on the course of depression may help explain this seeming paradox. Combined psychological treatment and antidepressant medication may be available, and beneficial, for depressed people in socioeconomically advantaged areas. But more Australians with depression live in disadvantaged areas where antidepressant medication provision without formal psychotherapy is more typical; there also are urban/non-urban disparities. Depressed people often engage in self-help strategies consistent with psychological treatments, probably often with some benefit to these people. We propose then, if people are encouraged to rely heavily on antidepressant medication only, and if they consequently reduce spontaneous self-help activity, that the benefits of the antidepressant medication may be more than offset by reductions in beneficial effects as a consequence of reduced self-help activity. While in advantaged areas, more comprehensive service delivery may result in observed prevalence lower than it would be without services, in less well-serviced areas, observed prevalence may be higher than it would otherwise be. Overall, then, we see no change. If the hypotheses receive support from the proposed research, then implications for service prioritisation and delivery could include a case for wider application of recovery-oriented practice. Critically, it would strengthen the case for action to correct inequities in the delivery of psychological treatments for depression in Australia so that combined psychological therapy and antidepressant medication, accessible and administered within an empowering framework, should be a nationally implemented standard.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3