In the United Kingdom, the “Research Assessment Exercise” is used by central government as a way of distributing infra-structure funds to University departments to support research. Departments with the highest ratings get extra support, while departments with low ratings may have their existing support withdrawn. The paper describes an exercise aimed at improving the rating obtained by one such department.

This editorial provides an overview of how far access to mental health care is limited by perceptions of stigma and anticipated discrimination. Globally over 70% of young people and adults with mental illness receive no treatment from healthcare staff. The rates of non-treatment are far higher in low income countries. Evidence from some descriptive studies and epidemiological surveys suggest that potent factors increasing the likelihood of treatment avoidance, or long delays before presenting for care include: (i) lack of knowledge about the features and treatability of mental illnesses; (ii) ignorance about how to access assessment and treatment; (iii) prejudice against people who have mental illness, and (iv) expectations of discrimination against people who have a diagnosis of mental illness. The associations between low rates of help seeking, and stigma and discrimination are as yet poorly understood and require more careful characterisation and analysis, providing the platform for more effective action to ensure that a greater proportion of people with mental illness are effectively treated in future.

Aims – Evidence from the literature show that patients affected by psychosis rarely are informed about their diagnosis and/or involved in the decision making process regarding the therapeutic program. The aim of the present study is to investigate psychiatrists' clinical experiences, beliefs and attitudes towards communicating the diagnosis to patients affected by psychosis. Method – Three focus groups were conducted with 28 psychiatrists of different levels of expertise (10 senior psychiatrists and 18 psychiatrists in training), all working at the South-Verona Community-based Mental Health Service. The group discussions were audiotaped and transcribed. The authors derived different thematic categories which were used by two raters to classify all contributions of the psychiatrists. Results – The main themes of interest which emerged were: experience with the communication of the diagnosis of psychosis and main communication strategies used; obstacles and personal difficulties in giving such information. Conclusions – In the psychiatric setting the disclosure of the diagnosis of psychosis implies different clinical and ethical issues and is felt as highly problematic. These findings suggest a need of psychiatrists to involve the psychotic patient in the information giving process in order to learn his/her informative needs which are the starting point for individually tailored information.

The authors have no potential conflict of interest related to the subject of the paper. No economic support has been received for this study.

Aims – Specialist interventions in community psychiatry for severe mental illness are expanding and their place needs to be re-examined. Methods – Recent literature is reviewed to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of specialist teams. Results – Good community mental health services reduce drop out from care, prevent suicide and unnatural deaths, and reduce admission to hospital. Most of these features have been also demonstrated by assertive community outreach and crisis resolution teams when good community services are not available. In well established community services assertive community teams do not reduce admission but both practitioners and patients prefer this service to other approaches and it leads to better engagement. Crisis resolution teams appear to be more successful than assertive community teams in preventing admission to hospital, although head- to-head comparisons have not yet been made. All specialist teams have the potential of fragmenting services and thereby reducing continuity of care. Conclusions – The assets of improved engagement and greater satisfaction with assertive, crisis resolution and home treatment teams are clear from recent evidence, but to improve integration of services they are probably best incorporated into community mental health services rather than standing alone.

Declaration of Interest: The author has been the sole consultant in two assertive outreach teams since 1994 and might there- fore be expected to be in favour of this genre of service. He has received grants for evaluation of different services models from the Department of Health (UK) and the Medical Research Council (UK).

Aims – This paper aims to describe current trends in the UK primary care management of common mental disorders and explore the appropriateness of differing management approaches in light of the course and common complications of these disorders. Methods – It highlights key findings concerning the course and comorbidity of depression to indicate that depression and associated mental illnesses may often form part of more complex patterns of ill health and that these conditions have a clear potential for chronicity. A narrative review of studies providing detail of depression prevalence in selected comorbid conditions is presented for this purpose. Conclusion – The presentation and course of common mental disorders indicate organizational changes in health service delivery, and - for a sizeable patient group – the use of chronic disease management strategies.

Declaration of Interest: None.

Aims – Psychiatric patients often are not informed about their diagnosis and their involvement in the decision making process is rare. Aim of the study was to explore the informative needs of patients with schizophrenia and the knowledge about their illness. Method – Three focus groups were conducted with 25 long-stay patients with the diagnosis of schizophrenia, attending the Mental Health Centre of the South-Verona Community-based Mental Health Service. The group discussions were audiotaped and transcribed. Results – The authors identified 18 different thematic categories which were used by two raters to classify all patient contributions. The interrater reliability was satisfactory. The qualitative analysis evidenced that patients have little knowledge about their illness. Patients had confuse and vague ideas on schizophrenia but their knowledge on drug names, dosages and side effects appeared precise and detailed. Several patients have looked for information in encyclopedias and medical dictionaries. Conclusion – The findings suggest a need of patients affected by schizophrenia for an information exchange with their psychiatrists that takes into account their informative needs, corrects wrong beliefs and actively involves them in therapeutic decisions.

Aims — To assess in a national sample the ability of GPs to detect psychiatric disorders using a clinical vs. a standardized interview and to characterize the patients that were falsely diagnosed with an anxiety or affective disorder. Methods — This is a national, cross—sectional, epidemiological survey, carried out by GPs on a random sample of their patients. The GPs were randomly divided into two groups. Apart from the routine clinical interview, the experimental group (group A) had to administer the Mini—International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Results — Data was collected by 143 GPs. 17.2% of all patients had a clinical diagnosis of an affective disorder, and 25.4% a clinical diagnosis of an anxiety disorder. In group A, the number of clinical diagnoses was about twice that of MINI diagnoses for affective disorders and one and a half times that for anxiety disorders. The majority of clinical diagnoses were represented by MINI subsyndromal cases (52.3%). Females showed a higher OR of being over—detected by GPs with anxiety disorders or of not being diagnosed with an affective disorder. Being divorced/separated/widowed increased the OR of over—detection of affective and anxiety disorders. The OR of over—detection of an affective or an anxiety disorder was higher for individuals with a moderate to poor quality of life. Conclusions — In the primary care a gap exists between clinical and standardized interviews in the detection of affective and anxiety disorders. Some experiential and social factors can increase this tendency. The use of a psycho.

Declaration of Interest: GlaxoSmithKline provided unrestricted economic and organizational support to the study. No further declarations on other form of financing or any other involvement that might be considered a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

Amartya Sen, who received the Nobel Prize for Economics, has demonstrated that the incidence of deprivation, in terms of capability, can be surprisingly high even in the most developed countries of the world. The study of socio-economic inequalities, in relation to the utilisation of health services, is a priority for epidemiological research. Socio-economic status (SES) has no universal definition. Within the international research literature, SES has been related to social class, social position, occupational status, educational attainment, income, wealth and standard of living. Existing research studies have shown that people from a more deprived social background, with a lower SES, are more likely to have a higher psychiatric morbidity. Many studies show that SES influences psychiatric services utilization, however the real factors linking SES and mental health services utilisation remain unclear. In this editorial we discuss what is currently known about the relationship between SES and the use of mental health services. We also make an argument for why we believe there is still much to uncover in this field, to understand fully how individuals are influenced by their personal socio-economic status, or the neighbourhood in which they live, in terms of their use of mental health services. Further research in this area will help clarify what interventions are required to provide greater equality in access to mental health services.

Aims — To investigate the prevalence of psychotherapy intervention in five Italian Centres for Mental Health. Analysing sociodemographic characteristics, geographical differences, frequencies of psychotherapy interventions, and the costs of these interventions. Methods — Five Italian Community—based Psychiatric Services collected data from 1250 patients during October 2002. Socio—demographic and clinical characteristics and GAF scores were collected at baseline. All psychiatric contacts during the following six months were recorded and categorised into 24 service contact categories. A comparison between patients who received or did not receive psychotherapy was made. Results — The socio—demographic characteristics of patients are very similar to those found in previous studies; there is a great difference in the number of psychotherapy treatments between the five areas. Psychotherapy patients use different services compared to the other patients, and their care cost less. Conclusions — This study provides a description of the provision of psychotherapy by Italian Mental Health Services. Further research is required into this topic.

Declaration of Interest: None.

Aim – The purpose of this review is to summarize the evidence base on the effectiveness of (a) screening for depression in primary care; (b) managing depression in primary care employing specific management strategies; (c) treating primary care depressive patients with antidepressants. Methods – Meta-review of all available reviews of the evidence. Results – Screening alone does not improve the recognition, management and outcome of depression in primary care settings. Management strategies, including (a) training primary care staff, (b) consultation-liaison, (c) collaborative care, (d) replacement/referral are supported by insufficient evidence to provide a definite answer as to the clinical effectiveness of individual models. Robust evidence exists to encourage physicians to prescribe effective doses of antidepressants in patients with moderate to severe depression who seek treatment in primary care settings. Conclusion – Population-level screening campaigns have a negative ratio of costs to benefits. However, at an individual-level of care increasing the ability of primary care physicians in recognising depression remains a relevant factor. Primary care physicians should consider whether depression is mild, moderate or severe. This patient categorisation help develop appropriate management and therapeutic strategies.

Declaration of Interest: none