OBJECTIVES

This study described the demographic and clinical profile, mental health problems, prevalence of psychiatric conditions, psychosocial interventions used, and outcomes of the management of mental health problems among in-patients admitted to non-psychiatry units of tertiary hospitals referred to mental health care providers; and described gender-disaggregated data related to mental health care providers and patients receiving psychosocial interventions in tertiary hospitals.

METHODS

This study employed a mixed-method design, using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies following the convergence model of triangulation. The following were the data sources: (1) cross-sectional review of charts of patients referred for psychosocial problems using the ICD-10 classification; (2) a survey of mental health service providers; (3) key informant interviews of mental health service providers; and (4) focus group discussions of mental health providers. All data were collated, compared, and contrasted, then analyzed using the convergence model of triangulation design.

RESULTS

Among the 3,502 patients in the chart review, 1,870 (53.40%) were males. The median age was 46.08 years and 92.06% were adults. The most common diagnosis among the patients were mood disorder (744, 21.25%) and organic mental disorder (710, 20.27%). Combination treatment of psychosocial intervention and pharmacology was the most common strategy received by patients. There was a higher proportion of patients admitted to public hospitals (996, 45.27%) who received psychosocial interventions only compared to those admitted to private hospitals (235, 18.05%). There were 3,453 out of 3,502 in-patients referred for psychiatric intervention. Of these 2,420 (70%) received psychoeducation, 2,365 (68.5%), received supportive psychotherapy/counseling, 535 (15.5%) family therapy, and 286 (8.3%) behavior modification. There were more patients given psychosocial interventions 2,541 (72.56%) who were discharged with instruction to follow-up, while around one in 10 (456, 13.02%) was not instructed to do a follow-up consultation. The types of interventions across all data sources were similar.

CONCLUSION

The most common type of management for psychosocial problems of in-patients in tertiary hospitals was a combination of psychosocial intervention and pharmacotherapy. Psychoeducation, supportive psychotherapy/ counseling, and family therapy were the most often given psychosocial interventions. The patient-related reasons for the choice of interventions were patient’s medical status (diagnosis and severity of symptoms) and psychological status (psychological mindedness), while the provider-related factors influencing the choice of intervention were provider’s skills and personal preference. Moreover, resources (human and material) and service provision policies (treatment guidelines and aftercare interventions) were the most common hospital-related factors. Further prospective research to determine the associated patients, providers, and hospital factors in larger geographic and cultural settings will provide evidence for the effectiveness and outcomes of psychosocial interventions.

Human ; Counseling ; Psychotherapy ; Family Therapy ; Mental Health

Objectives: This study described the demographic and clinical profile, mental health problems, prevalence of psychiatric conditions, psychosocial interventions used, and outcomes of the management of mental health problems among in-patients admitted to non-psychiatry units of tertiary hospitals referred to mental health care providers; and described gender-disaggregated data related to mental health care providers and patients receiving psychosocial interventions in tertiary hospitals. Methods: This study employed a mixed-method design, using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies following the convergence model of triangulation. The following were the data sources: (1) cross-sectional review of charts of patients referred for psychosocial problems using the ICD-10 classification; (2) a survey of mental health service providers; (3) key informant interviews of mental health service providers; and (4) focus group discussions of mental health providers. All data were collated, compared, and contrasted, then analyzed using the convergence model of triangulation design. Results: Among the 3,502 patients in the chart review, 1,870 (53.40%) were males. The median age was 46.08 years and 92.06% were adults. The most common diagnosis among the patients were mood disorder (744, 21.25%) and organic mental disorder (710, 20.27%). Combination treatment of psychosocial intervention and pharmacology was the most common strategy received by patients. There was a higher proportion of patients admitted to public hospitals (996, 45.27%) who received psychosocial interventions only compared to those admitted to private hospitals (235, 18.05%). There were 3,453 out of 3,502 in-patients referred for psychiatric intervention. Of these 2,420 (70%) received psychoeducation, 2,365 (68.5%), received supportive psychotherapy/counseling, 535 (15.5%) family therapy, and 286 (8.3%) behavior modification. There were more patients given psychosocial interventions 2,541 (72.56%) who were discharged with instruction to follow-up, while around one in 10 (456, 13.02%) was not instructed to do a follow-up consultation. The types of interventions across all data sources were similar. Conclusion The most common type of management for psychosocial problems of in-patients in tertiary hospitals was a combination of psychosocial intervention and pharmacotherapy. Psychoeducation, supportive psychotherapy/ counseling, and family therapy were the most often given psychosocial interventions. The patient-related reasons for the choice of interventions were patient’s medical status (diagnosis and severity of symptoms) and psychological status (psychological mindedness), while the provider-related factors influencing the choice of intervention were provider’s skills and personal preference. Moreover, resources (human and material) and service provision policies (treatment guidelines and aftercare interventions) were the most common hospital-related factors. Further prospective research to determine the associated patients, providers, and hospital factors in larger geographic and cultural settings will provide evidence for the effectiveness and outcomes of psychosocial interventions.
psychosocial

Introduction: This study determined the relationship of personal factors and gaming factors with Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD). It aimed to provide information on the association of IGD with depression, anxiety, stress and both depression and anxiety among adolescent gamers. Methods: This was an analytic cross-sectional study among 560 14-18-year-old adolescents from two public high schools in Pasay City that used the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale–Short-Form (IGDS9-SF), Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 items (DASS-21) and gamer profile questionnaires. Results: The prevalence of Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) was low at 1.1%, while moderate depression was observed in 67%, stress in 46.8%, both depression and anxiety in 64.8%, and high anxiety in 89.3% among adolescents. Using multiple logistic regression to control the effects of possible confounders, the association of IGD with depression (OR 0.971, 95% CI 0.085-11.084, p-value .981), anxiety (OR 6.0x107, p-value .999), stress (OR 6.135, 95% CI 0.373-100.991, p-value .204) and both depression and anxiety (OR 1.027, 95% CI 0.089-11.846, p-value .983) were not statistically significant. Conclusion The odds of depression, anxiety, stress and both depression and anxiety were higher among those with IGD as compared to those without IGD. However, it is not statistically significant. This study recommended further validation of the new IGD definition in the local setting and longitudinal studies with a larger population to determine other factors associated with mental disorders.
Adolescent ; Internet ; Depression ; Anxiety

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have spread globally and reached the Philippines in late January 2020. This study is the first local and nationwide research on admitted COVID-19 adult patients: their clinic-demographic profiles, managements, and clinical outcomes. We aim to determine the associated factors with mortality among COVID-19 patients. Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study of rt-PCR confirmed and admitted COVID-19 adult patients in 89 hospitals in the Philippines from February to July, 2020. The data on admission of patient’s demographic, clinical, laboratory, pre-hospital and during hospital treatment management and in-hospital clinical outcomes were gathered. The data were described and analyzed using multiple logistic regression analysis. Results: There were 2884 rt-PCR confirmed and admitted COVID-19 adult patients included in the study. Majority were Filipinos (99·4%), with slightly more males (54.4%) than females. 21% were healthcare workers (HCWs). Mortality was higher among non-HCWs at 16% versus 2% among HCWs. 63% of the patients had a co-morbidity, which included hypertension (69%), diabetes mellitus (48%) and chronic kidney disease (26%). The significantly associated factors with mortality in this Philippine cohort were: age >60 years, hypertension as co-morbidity, tachypnea (> 22/minute), WBC count > 10 x 109 /L, and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (all p<0.05). Elevated serum LDH was the strongest factor associated with mortality (OR of 8.74, p=0.004). Conclusion This study identified that age, hypertension, tachypnea, elevated WBC count, and elevated serum LDH were associated with mortality among COVID-19 adult patients and results were consistent with results from studies done in other countries. We recommend that early detection and awareness of exposures and symptoms will improve the management and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 adult patients. Also, a long follow-up of the outcomes of COVID-19 to determine the effectiveness of treatment is recommended for further study.
Philippines ; Mortality