Mental health problems are common in primary health care, particularly anxiety and depression. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of common mental disorders and their associations with socio-demographic characteristics in primary care in Brazil (Family Health Strategy). It involved a multicenter cross-sectional study with patients from Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Fortaleza (Ceará State) and Porto Alegre (Rio Grande do Sul State), assessed using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD). The rate of mental disorders in patients from Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Fortaleza and Porto Alegre were found to be, respectively, 51.9%, 53.3%, 64.3% and 57.7% with significant differences between Porto Alegre and Fortaleza compared to Rio de Janeiro after adjusting for confounders. Prevalence proportions of mental problems were especially common for females, the unemployed, those with less education and those with lower incomes. In the context of the Brazilian government's moves towards developing primary health care and reorganizing mental health policies it is relevant to consider common mental disorders as a priority alongside other chronic health conditions.

OBJECTIVE: Common mental disorders are present in more than 50% of patients attending primary care clinics. The main objectives of this study were to detect whether there is any special group of patients within the Family Health Strategy that should be considered to be in greater risk for common mental disorders and to recommend alternative interventions to aid these patients. METHOD: In 2002, a cross-sectional study on common mental disorders seen at Family Health Strategy centers was conducted in Petrópolis, State of Rio de Janeiro. RESULTS: Common mental disorders were associated with women (OR = 2.90; 95% CI 1.82-4.32), younger than 45 years of age (OR = 1.43; 95% CI 1.02-2.01), with a monthly per capita family income of less than US$40.00 (OR = 1.68; 95% CI 1.20-2.39), and without a partner (OR = 1.71; 95% CI 1.22-2.39). Illiteracy was associated with common mental disorders among patients who were not extremely poor. Social support networks such as going often to church (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.43-0.89); participating in artistic and sporting activities (OR = 0.42; 95% CI 0.26-0.70) and having at least four trusted relatives or friends (OR = 0.53; 95% CI 0.31-0.91) was inversely associated with common mental disorders. DISCUSSION: Poor women with little social support represent a special group at risk for common mental disorders in the primary care setting. Some countries have developed special interventions to treat patients with common mental disorders in primary care. CONCLUSION: Mental health care programs could include evidence-based psychosocial interventions to assist women in overcoming the vicious circle of poverty and dealing with their mental disorders.

No abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to investigate how doctors working in primary health care in Latin American address patients with common mental disorders and to investigate how stigma can affect their clinical decisions.MethodsUsing a cross-sectional design, we applied an online self-administered questionnaire to a sample of 550 Primary Care Physicians (PCPs) from Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba and Chile. The questionnaire collected information about sociodemographic variables, training and experience with mental health care. Clinicians’ stigmatizing attitudes towards mental health were measured using the Mental Illness Clinicians' Attitudes Scale (MICA v4). The clinical decisions of PCPs were assessed through three clinical vignettes representing typical cases of depression, anxiety and somatization.ResultsA total of 387 professionals completed the questionnaires (70.3% response rate). The 63.7% of the PCPs felt qualified to diagnose and treat people with common mental disorders. More than 90% of the PCPs from Bolivia, Cuba and Chile agreed to treat the patients presented in the three vignettes. We did not find significant differences between the four countries in the scores of the MICA v4 stigma levels, with a mean = 36.3 and SD = 8.3 for all four countries. Gender (p = .672), age (p = .171), training (p = .673) and years of experience (p = .28) were unrelated to stigma. In the two multivariate regression models, PCPs with high levels of stigma were more likely to refer them to a psychiatrist the patients with depression (OR = 1.03, 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.07 p<0.05) and somatoform symptoms somatoform (OR = 1.03, 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.07, p<0.05) to a psychiatrist.DiscussionThe majority of PCPs in the four countries were inclined to treat patients with depression, anxiety and somatoform symptoms. PCPs with more levels of stigma were more likely to refer the patients with depression and somatoform symptoms to a psychiatrist. Stigmatizing attitudes towards mental disorders by PCPs might be important barriers for people with mental health problems to receive the treatment they need in primary care.

No abstract

The social support network is a health protective factor involving physical, mental and psychological aspects, providing a better quality of life, favoring better adaptation to adverse conditions, promoting resilience and mobilizing resources for a more effective coping with negative life events that can lead to illness. We aimed to analyze the association between physical diseases, common mental disorders and the social support network of patients serviced at primary care facilities in the cities of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo through a cross-sectional study with 1,466 patients in the 18-65 years age group. We used the Social Network Index (SNI) to assess the support network through the categories of isolation and integration. The doctor/nurse completed the questionnaire to evaluate the physical disease diagnosis, while the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to detect mental disorders. We found that the pattern of social support was different depending on the presence of physical diseases or mental disorders. Negative associations were found between diabetes and isolation; integration and anxiety; integration and depression. Positive associations were identified between isolation and anxiety and isolation and depression.

The objective of this study was to identify the association between emotional distress and social support networks with quality of life in primary care patients. This was a cross-sectional study involving 1,466 patients in the cities of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2009/2010. The General Health Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the brief version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument were used. The Social Support Network Index classified patients with the highest and lowest index as socially integrated or isolated. A bivariate analysis and four multiple linear regressions were conducted for each quality of life outcome. The means scores for the physical, psychological, social relations, and environment domains were, respectively, 64.7; 64.2; 68.5 and 49.1. In the multivariate analysis, the psychological domain was negatively associated with isolation, whereas the social relations and environment domains were positively associated with integration. Integration and isolation proved to be important factors for those in emotional distress as they minimize or maximize negative effects on quality of life.

Objective: To identify the associations among quality of life (QoL), social determinants and psychological distress in primary care in two cities in Brazil. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 1,466 patients from 2009 to 2010. The statistical analysis used the t-test to compare the variables of interest to the study. Results: The prevalence of Common Mental Disorders (CMD3), severe forms of Common Mental Disorders (CMD5), anxiety and depression were 20.5%, 32%, 37% and 25.1% respectively. Thes presence of psychological distress is associated with worse QoL among the patients studied, especially those older than 40 years of age. In cases of CMD3, those with higher income and educational levels presented higher QoL in the psychical and psychological domains. For the cases of probable anxiety, those with higher educational levels presented lower scores on the physical and social relationship scores. Conclusion: Psychological distress can be associated with a worse QoL among those studied and can be influenced by socioeconomic conditions. Therefore, it is important to structure patient-centered help, which should also include patients’ social contexts.