BackgroundA number of recently published randomized controlled trials conducted in developed countries have reported no advantage for assertive interventions over standard care models. One possible explanation could be that so-called "standard care" has become more comprehensive in recent years, incorporating some of the salient aspects of assertive models in its modus operandi. Our study represents the first randomised controlled trial assessing the effect of a modified assertive treatment service on readmission rates and other measures of outcome in a developing country.MethodsHigh frequency service users were randomized into an intervention (n = 34) and a control (n = 26) group. The control group received standard community care and the active group an assertive intervention based on a modified version of the international model of assertive community treatment. Study visits were conducted at baseline and 12 months with demographic and illness information collected at visit 1 and readmission rates documented at study end. Symptomatology and functioning were measured at both visits using the PANSS, CDSS, ESRS, WHO-QOL and SOFAS.ResultsAt 12 month follow-up subjects receiving the assertive intervention had significantly lower total PANSS (p = 0.02) as well as positive (p < 0.01) and general psychopathology (p = 0.01) subscales' scores. The mean SOFAS score was also significantly higher (p = 0.02) and the mean number of psychiatric admissions significantly lower (p < 0.01) in the intervention group.ConclusionsOur results indicate that assertive interventions in a developing setting where standard community mental services are often under resourced can produce significant outcomes. Furthermore, these interventions need not be as expensive and comprehensive as international, first-world models in order to reduce inpatient days, improve psychopathology and overall levels of functioning in patients with severe mental illness.

Results seem to indicate that HFU-specific interventions are vital to addressing these issues.

Our study confirmed a high overall degree of perceived stigmatization as well as suggesting some evidence for cultural influences on stigma. It was the first to provide South African data and as such can be regarded as central to our efforts in restructuring psychiatric services and clinical practices in a way that would minimize the effects of stigma and ultimately benefit our clients.

Background Stigmatising attitudes of health care professionals towards mental illness can impede treatment provided for psychiatric patients. Many studies have reported undergraduate training to be a critical period for changing the attitudes of medical students, and one particularly valuable intervention strategy involves time spent in a clinical psychiatric rotation. In South Africa, medical students are exposed to a clinical rotation in psychiatry but there is no evidence to show whether this has an effect on attitudes toward mental illness. Methods This prospective cohort study involved a convenience sample of 112 South African medical students in their 5th or 6th year of undergraduate training. This sample attended a 7-week psychiatry rotation. The Attitudes to Mental Illness Questionnaire (AMIQ) was used to assess students’ attitudes toward mental illness before and after the clinical rotation which includes exposure to a number of psychiatric sub-divisions and limited didactic inputs. Results There was a significant improvement ( p < 0.01, t -test) in the students’ attitude toward mental illness following the psychiatric rotation. Females displayed a more positive attitude towards mental illness at the end of the rotation compared to males. The participants’ attitude significantly deteriorated for the non-psychiatric vignette describing diabetes (< 0.01, t -test). Conclusions Our findings suggest that clinical training and exposure to a psychiatric setting impacts positively on medical students’ attitude towards mental illness, even when this training does not include any focused, didactic anti-stigma input.

BackgroundMany countries have over the last few years incorporated mental health assertive interventions in an attempt to address the repercussions of deinstitutionalization. Recent publications have failed to duplicate the positive outcomes reported initially which has cast doubt on the future of these interventions. We previously reported on 29 patients from a developing country who completed 12 months in an assertive intervention which was a modified version of the international assertive community treatment model. We demonstrated reduction in readmission rates as well as improvements in social functioning compared to patients from the control group. The obvious question was, however, if these outcomes could be sustained for longer periods of time. This study aims to determine if modified assertive interventions in an under-resourced setting can successfully maintain reductions in hospitalizations.MethodsPatients suffering from schizophrenia who met a modified version of Weidens’ high frequency criteria were randomized into two groups. One group received a modified assertive intervention based on the international assertive community treatment model. The other group received standard care according to the model of service delivery in this region. Data was collected after 36 months, comparing readmissions and days spent in hospital.ResultsThe results demonstrated significant differences between the groups. Patients in the intervention group had significantly less readmissions (p = 0.007) and spent less days in hospital compared to the patients in the control group (p = 0.013).ConclusionModified assertive interventions may be successful in reducing readmissions and days spent in hospital in developing countries where standard care services are less comprehensive. These interventions can be tailored in such a way to meet service needs and still remain affordable and feasible within the context of an under-resourced setting.