A global effort to advance systems change to address the needs of families where a parent has a mental illness.

As part of the Prato Collaborative I am undertaking a Delphi Study to explore the developmental journeys that nine different countries (including NI and Ireland) have undertaken to better meet the needs of families where a parent has a mental illness in adult mental health and children’s services. This research has potential to impact FFP in adult mental health and children's services.

Psychiatric Nurses’ Practice with Parents who have Mental Illness, their Children and Families, within Adult Mental Health Services in Ireland

Introduction: While it is recommended that mental health professionals engage in family focused practice (FFP), there is limited understanding regarding psychiatric nurses’ practice with parents who have mental illness, their children and families in adult mental health services.

Methods: This study utilized a mixed methods approach to measure the extent of psychiatric nurses’ family focused practice and factors that predicted it. It also sought to explore the nature and scope of high scoring psychiatric nurses’ FFP and factors that affected their capacity to engage in FFP. Three hundred and forty three psychiatric nurses in 12 mental health services throughout Ireland completed the Family Focused Mental Health Practice Questionnaire (FFMHPQ). Fourteen nurses who achieved high scores on the FFMHPQ also participated in semi-structured interviews.

Results: Whilst the majority of nurses were not family focused a substantial minority were. High scoring nurses’ practice was complex and multifaceted, comprising various family focused activities, principles and processes. Nurses’ capacity to engage in FFP was determined by their knowledge and skills, working in community settings and own parenting experience.

Providing a ‘whole-of-family’ approach to care: family-focused practices in mental health services

Introduction: Family members including children are all impacted by a family member’s mental illness. Although mental health services are increasingly encouraged to engage in family-focused practice, this is not a well-understood concept or practice in mental health care. Methods: An integrative review using systematic methods was conducted with international literature, with the aim of identifying concepts and practices of family-focused practice in child and youth and adult mental health services. Results: Findings from 40 peer-reviewed literature identified a range of understandings and applications of family-focused practice, including who comprises the ‘family’, whether the focus is family of origin or family of procreation or choice, and whether the context of practice is child and youth or adult. ‘Family’ as defined by its members forms the foundation for practice that aims to provide a whole-of-family approach to care. Six core practices comprise a family focus to care: assessment; psychoeducation; family care planning and goal-setting; liaison between families and services; instrumental, emotional and social support; and a coordinated system of care between families and services. Conclusion: By incorporating key principles and the core family-focused practices into their care delivery, clinicians can facilitate a whole-of-family approach to care and strengthen family members’ wellbeing and resilience, and their individual and collective health outcomes.

The mental health and wellbeing of first generation migrants: a systematic-narrative review of reviews

Background
First generation migrants are reportedly at higher risk of mental ill-health compared to the settled population. This paper systematically reviews and synthesizes all reviews on the mental health of first generation migrants in order to appraise the risk factors for, and explain differences in, the mental health of this population.
Methods
Scientific databases were searched for systematic reviews (inception-November 2015) which provided quantitative data on the mental ill-health of first generation migrants and associated risk factors. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full text papers for their suitability against pre-specified criteria, methodological quality was assessed.
Results
One thousand eight hundred twenty articles were identified, eight met inclusion criteria, which were all moderate or low quality. Depression was mostly higher in first generation migrants in general, and in refugees/asylum seekers when analysed separately. However, for both groups there was wide variation in prevalence rates, from 5 to 44 % compared with prevalence rates of 8–12 % in the general population. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder prevalence was higher for both first generation migrants in general and for refugees/asylum seekers compared with the settled majority. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder prevalence in first generation migrants in general and refugees/ asylum seekers ranged from 9 to 36 % compared with reported prevalence rates of 1–2 % in the general population. Few studies presented anxiety prevalence rates in first generation migrants and there was wide variation in those that did. Prevalence ranged from 4 to 40 % compared with reported prevalence of 5 % in the general population. Two reviews assessed the psychotic disorder risk, reporting this was two to three times more likely in adult first generation migrants. However, one review on the risk of schizophrenia in refugees reported similar prevalence rates (2 %) to estimates of prevalence among the settled majority (3 %). Risk factors for mental ill-health included low Gross National Product in the host country, downward social mobility, country of origin, and host country.
Conclusion
First generation migrants may be at increased risk of mental illness and public health policy must account for this and influencing factors. High quality research in the area is urgently needed as is the use of culturally specific validated measurement tools for assessing migrant mental health.

Informal caregiving and mental ill health – differential relationships by workload, gender, age and area-remoteness in a UK region

Informal caregiving can be a demanding role which has been shown to impact on physical, psychological and social wellbeing. Methodological weaknesses including small sample sizes and subjective measures of mental health have led to inconclusive evidence about the relationship between informal caregiving and mental health. This paper reports on a study carried out in a UK region which investigated the relationship between informal caregiving and mental ill health. The analysis was conducted by linking three datasets, the Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study, the Northern Ireland Enhanced Prescribing Database and the Proximity to Service Index from the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. Our analysis used both a subjective measure of mental ill health, i.e. a question asked in the 2011 Census, and an objective measure, whether the respondents had been prescribed antidepressants by a General Practitioner between 2010 and 2012. We applied binary logistic multilevel modelling to these two responses to test whether, and for what sub-groups of the population, informal caregiving was related to mental ill health. The results showed that informal caregiving per se was not related to mental ill health although there was a strong relationship between the intensity of the caregiving role and mental ill health. Females under 50, who provided over 19 hours of care, were not employed or worked part-time and who provided care in both 2001 and 2011 were at a statistically significantly elevated risk of mental ill health. Caregivers in remote areas with limited access to shops and services were also at a significantly increased risk as evidenced by prescription rates for antidepressants. With community care policies aimed at supporting people to remain at home, the paper highlights the need for further research in order to target resources appropriately.