| Literature DB >> 22289204 |
Laura Pedrini1, Giovanni Colasurdo, Stefano Costa, Michela Fabiani, Linda Ferraresi, Emilio Franzoni, Francesca Masina, Renato Moschen, Vittoria Neviani, Stefano Palazzi, Roberto Parisi, Antonia Parmeggiani, Antonio Preti, Cosimo Ricciutello, Marco Bl Rocchi, Davide Sisti, Antonio Squarcia, Stefano Trebbi, Donatella Turchetti, Paola Visconti, Andrea Tullini, Giovanni de Girolamo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, no studies have assessed in detail the characteristics, organisation, and functioning of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). This information gap represents a major limitation for researchers and clinicians because most mental disorders have their onset in childhood or adolescence, and effective interventions can therefore represent a major factor in avoiding chronicity. Interventions and mental health care are delivered by and through services, and not by individual, private clinicians, and drawbacks or limitations of services generally translate in inappropriateness and ineffectiveness of treatments and interventions: therefore information about services is essential to improve the quality of care and ultimately the course and outcome of mental disorders in childhood and adolescence.The present paper reports the results of the first study aimed at providing detailed, updated and comprehensive data on CAMHS of a densely populated Italian region (over 4 million inhabitants) with a target population of 633,725 subjects aged 0-17 years.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22289204 PMCID: PMC3310734 DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-12-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Psychiatry ISSN: 1471-244X Impact factor: 3.630
Full-time-equivalent (FTE) CAMHS Professionals
| CAMHS full time equivalent professionals | N target population (0-17)/N professionals | N users/N professionals | Number professionals/100.000 target population (0-17) | Number professionals/100.000 total population | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11.19 (8.01) | 4-29 | 5.807 (1152) | 4.128-8.254 | 343 (91) | 233-488 | 19.7 | 3.09 | |
| 13.3 (8.25) | 0-27 | 4.507 (1577) | 2.727-8.128 | 260 (85) | 161-433 | 23.2 | 3.64 | |
| 19.41 (10.40) | 6-41 | 3.121 (583) | 2.199-3.962 | 183 (41) | 129-255 | 34.2 | 5.37 | |
| 11.38 (7.32) | 2-28 | 6.150 (2809) | 3.075-11.843 | 352 (144) | 193-700 | 19.7 | 3.09 | |
| 10.75 (9.86) | 0-29 | 5.974 (3056) | 2.800-11.352 | 364 (205) | 145-745 | 18.6 | 2.92 | |
| 1.17 (1.42) | 0-4 | 36.699 (19972) | 10.464-68.645 | 2.028 (1099) | 469-3.655 | 2.05 | 0.32 | |
* Number of CAMHS without this health professional category
Range of CAMHS activities and procedures (*)
| N (%) | |
|---|---|
| • Meetings with Schools for disabled children | 110 (100%) |
| • Counselling | 100 (90.9%) |
| • Individual rehabilitation training-social skills training | 81 (73.6%) |
| • Group rehabilitation training | 64 (58.2%) |
| • Monthly meetings with welfare agencies | 60 (54.5%) |
| • Psychoeducation | 56 (50.9%) |
| • Consultation to paediatric firs aid | 39(35.5%) |
| • Parent training | 26 (23.6%) |
| • Art therapy and labs | 23 (20.9%) |
| • Cognitive behavioural group therapy | 19 (17.3%) |
| • Psychoanalytic group therapy | 14 (12.7%) |
| • Pet therapy | 7 (6.4%) |
| • Music Therapy | 6 (5.5%) |
| 91 (82.7%) | |
| 103 (93.6%) | |
| • weekly | 29 (26.4%) |
| • biweekly | 36 (32.7%) |
| • monthly | 26 (23.6%) |
| • less frequently | 19 (17.3%) |
| 75 (68.2%) | |
| • Pervasive developmental disorder | 30 (27.3%) |
| • Language disorders | 13 (11.8%) |
| • Attention Deficit/Hyperactive Disorder | 22 (20.0%) |
| • Eating disorders | 21 (19.1%) |
| • Chronic and disabling disorders | 15 (13.6%) |
| 69 (62.7%) | |
| 86 (78.2%) | |
| 67 (60.9) | |
(*) Information on the number (%) of units applying procedures
Figure 1Distribution of all diagnoses in the target population (0-17 years). Data refer to number of patients in treatment per 100,000 inhabitants aged 0-17 years, with standard deviations.
Figure 2Scatterplot of target population versus population in contact with CAMHS; strait line shows a linear regression curve.
Figure 3Scatterplot of linear correlation of first visits number versus contact with CAMHS; strait line shows linear regression line.