Aims:In order to improve long-term prognosis in schizophrenia, enhancing medication adherence is essential. The aim of this study was thus to identify the association between medication non-adherence and possible risk factors in a large sample of patients with chronic schizophrenia. Methods:One hundred and four patients with schizophrenia with a disease duration of over 10 years were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. The subjects were assessed with the Scale to Assess Unawareness of Mental Disease-Korean version, the Korean version of the Medication Adherence Rating Scale, a neurocognition battery designed for this study, and the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale. An ANOVA and multiple regression models were conducted to identify the correlations among variables and the factors that contribute to medication adherence. Results:The adherence score measured on the Korean version of the Medication Adherence Rating Scale was 7.60 ± 2.12; 88 (84.62%) patients were categorized as well-adherent and 16 (15.38%) as poorly adherent to their medication. Patients with good insight were more likely to maintain their medication (P = 0.0005), and better executive function was associated with increased medication adherence (P = 0.0008). Furthermore, fewer depressive symptoms were associated with good medication adherence (P = 0.0304).Conclusions: This study is the first in the Republic of Korea to identify the relationship between medication adherence, insight, and neurocognition in a large sample of patients with chronic schizophrenia. These results could be used to establish a strategy for improving the prognosis of chronic schizophrenia.

ObjectivePromoting mental health and preventing mental health problems are important tasks for international organizations and nations. Such goals entail the establishment of active information networks and effective systems and indicators to assess the mental health of populations. This being said, there is a need in Korea develop ways to measure the state of mental health in Korea.MethodsThis paper reviews the mental health indicator development policies and practices of seven organizations, countries, and regions: WHO, OECD, EU, United States, Australia, UK, and Scotland. Using Delphi method, we conducted two surveys of mental health indicators for experts in the field of mental health. The survey questionnaire included 5 domains: mental health status, mental health factor, mental health system, mental health service, and quality of mental health services. We considered 124 potential mental health indicators out of more than 600 from indicators of international organizations and foreign countries.ResultsWe obtained the top 30 mental health indicators from the surveys. Among them, 10 indicators belong to the mental health system. The most important five mental health indicators are suicide rate, rate of increase in mental disorder treatment, burden caused by mental disorders, adequacy of identifying problems of mental health projects and deriving solutions, and annual prevalence of mental disorders.ConclusionOur study provides information about the process for indicator development and the use of survey results to measure the mental health status of the Korean population. The aim of mental health indicator development is to improve the mental health system by better grasping the current situation. We suggest these mental health indicators can monitor progress in efforts to implement reform policies, provide community services, and involve users, families and other stakeholders in mental health promotion, prevention, care and rehabilitation.

Objective Disruptive behavior disorder (DBD) adversely impacts children and adolescents. However, a comprehensive and cost-effective scale to assess DBD is lacking in Korea. Therefore, this study translated the Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale (DBDRS) into Korean and analyzed its psychometric properties.Methods Parents and primary caregivers of non-clinical (n=429) and clinical (n=28) children and adolescents aged 6–15 years were included in the analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted; further, concurrent validity and internal consistency were investigated using correlation analysis and Cronbach’s alpha, respectively. Furthermore, discriminative capacity was estimated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.Results The four-factor model of K-DBDRS showed good model fit indices and factor loadings, which supported the construct validity of the scale. Strong correlations between K-DBDRS and related measurements were observed, and a robust level of Cronbach’s alpha was confirmed (0.891–0.933). The discriminative capacity of the scale was good, based on the area under the curve values (0.933–0.953).Conclusion This study indicated that the K-DBDRS is an appropriate screening tool for Korean children and adolescents. Thus, this scale can be applied in clinical and community settings to identify children and adolescents with disruptive behavior disorders.

No abstract

Background: Job stress of mental health professionals can have a negative impact on them, particularly their psychological health and mortality, and may also affect organizations' and institutions' ability to provide quality mental health services to patients.Aim: This study aimed to: (1) investigate the validity and reliability of the Korean Mental Health Professionals Stress Scale (K-MHPSS), (2) develop K-MHPSS cut-off points to measure clinical depression and anxiety, and (3) examine whether specific stressors vary by area of expertise.Methodology: Data were collected via an online survey over 3 months, from August to October 2020. An online survey using a survey website was administered to volunteers who accessed the link and consented to participate. Data from 558 participants (200 clinical psychologists, 157 nurses, and 201 social workers) were included in the final analysis. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were conducted to examine the factor structure of the K-MHPSS; concurrent validity of the scale was determined by analyzing correlation; internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha coefficient. In addition, ROC curve analysis and Youden's index were used to estimate optimal cut-off points for K-MHPSS; one-way ANOVA was performed to investigate the difference among the three groups.Results: The seven-factor model of the original scale did not be replicated by Korean mental health professionals. The K-MHPSS had the best fit with the six-factor model, which consists of 34 items. Concurrent validity was confirmed, and overall reliability was found to be good. The K-MHPSS cut-off points for depression and anxiety appeared to slightly different by professional groups. Furthermore, nurses and social workers showed significantly higher total scores compared to clinical psychologists, and there are significant differences in subscale scores among professionals.Conclusion: The Korean version of the MHPSS has appropriate psychometric properties and can be used to assess the occupational stress of mental health professionals. It can also serve as a reference point for screening clinical level of depression and anxiety in mental health professionals.