A survey of the mental health workforce in Guangdong: implications for policy and workforce planning

Abstract

Guangdong province has a significant treatment gap for severe mental illness and a shortage in the mental health workforce. The distribution of the mental health workforce and facilities is imbalanced towards hospital care rather than community care.

Current needs for the improved management of depressive disorder in community healthcare centres, Shenzhen, China: a view from primary care medical leaders

“…Primary care medical leaders in Shenzhen are both willing and increasingly in a position to make real improvements to providing appropriate care to depression patients, especially when supported by the active health system reform. Similar to other studies [39, 61, 62], high patient-loads, short consultation-times, limited patient privacy and inexperienced staff were seen by doctors to hinder the initial assessment and identification of depression. Doctors welcomed the governments’ response to upskilling primary care resource through the “One Psychiatric Doctor per Community Health Centre”, a recognized goal of the 2015–2020 National Mental Health Work Plan [38].…”

Chinese perspectives on primary care for common mental disorders: Barriers and policy implications

“…The situation is the same in Hong Kong. However, under the mental health law for Mainland China issued in 2013, only psychiatrists can diagnose mental disorders (Li et al, 2015; Phillips et al, 2013; Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, 2012). Thus, most PCPs can only recognize patients with potential mental health problems and refer them to psychiatrists for a formal diagnosis.…”

Healthcare ecosystems research in mental health: a scoping review of methods to describe the context of local care delivery

“…Six instruments providing data on service availability were identified in the included studies, and these were used in a total of 31 papers. Three of these were psychometrically validated instruments: ESMS/DESDE (Description and Evaluation of Services and Directories for Long Term Care-an evolution of the ESMS and thus described together) (used in 12 papers: [20, 28, 34, 48, 52, 53, 56, 58–61, 64]); WHO-AIMS: (used in 11 papers [21, 22, 24, 25, 27, 31, 33, 50, 51, 62, 63]); and MHCP (used in three papers [43–45]). ESMS/DESDE and WHO-AIMS are based on taxonomies of care (ESMS/DESDE on a hierarchical tree taxonomy), and DESDE has undergone formal ontological analysis [65].…”

“…Seven studies included the health sector only [30, 32, 38, 39, 46, 62, 63]. Eighteen studies included the health and social sectors [19, 20, 22, 23, 26, 29, 31, 33, 45, 49, 50, 52, 54–56, 59, 61, 64]. This included papers using MHCP and ASME.…”

“…In those papers using instruments to provide data on service availability, this was WHO-AIMS in 11 papers (24%) [21, 22, 24, 25, 27, 31, 33, 50, 51, 62, 63], ESMS/DESDE in 12 papers (26%) [20, 28, 34, 48, 52, 53, 56, 58–61, 64], MHCP in three papers [43–45] (7%), ASME in three papers (7%) [23, 54, 55] and the PRIME [29] and PROMO [47] project instruments in one paper each (2%).…”