Melissa J Hull1,2, Kate M Fennell2,3,4,5, Kari Vallury6, Martin Jones6, James Dollman1,2. 1. Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 2. Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 3. Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men's Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 4. Cancer Council SA, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 5. Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 6. University Department of Rural Health, University of South Australia, Whyalla, South Australia, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the differences between farming and non-farming rural adults in perceived barriers to mental health service use. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey, modified from the Barriers to Help-Seeking Scale (BHSS), was conducted using a computer-assisted telephone interview. SETTING: Respondents (age 52.6 ± 11.6 years) were recruited from three rural regions of South Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Approximately, 78 non-farmers and 45 farmers were included in analyses. 78 retired and two unemployed participants were excluded from the analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Farmers and non-farmers were compared on domain scores and individual item responses from the adapted BHSS that represent 'agrarian' attitudes to support-seeking for mental health: stoicism, self-reliance, minimisation of the problem, stigma and distrust of health professionals. RESULTS: In the analysis of domain scores, 'Need for Control and Self-Reliance' was a stronger barrier for farmers than non-farmers (P = 0.009) with a trend (P = 0.07) towards stronger barriers among farmers in the 'Minimising Problem and Resignation' domain. In the analysis of item-level responses, there was a difference (P = 0.03) between farmers and non-farmers in responses to 'I find it difficult to understand my doctor/health professional', with 24.4% of the farmers agreeing that this is a barrier compared with 15.3% of the non-farmers. CONCLUSION: Long-held stereotypes of stoicism and self-reliance among farmers were somewhat supported, in the context of mental health. Mental health services and professionals in rural Australia might need to adapt their practices to successfully engage this population.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the differences between farming and non-farming rural adults in perceived barriers to mental health service use. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey, modified from the Barriers to Help-Seeking Scale (BHSS), was conducted using a computer-assisted telephone interview. SETTING: Respondents (age 52.6 ± 11.6 years) were recruited from three rural regions of South Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Approximately, 78 non-farmers and 45 farmers were included in analyses. 78 retired and two unemployed participants were excluded from the analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Farmers and non-farmers were compared on domain scores and individual item responses from the adapted BHSS that represent 'agrarian' attitudes to support-seeking for mental health: stoicism, self-reliance, minimisation of the problem, stigma and distrust of health professionals. RESULTS: In the analysis of domain scores, 'Need for Control and Self-Reliance' was a stronger barrier for farmers than non-farmers (P = 0.009) with a trend (P = 0.07) towards stronger barriers among farmers in the 'Minimising Problem and Resignation' domain. In the analysis of item-level responses, there was a difference (P = 0.03) between farmers and non-farmers in responses to 'I find it difficult to understand my doctor/health professional', with 24.4% of the farmers agreeing that this is a barrier compared with 15.3% of the non-farmers. CONCLUSION: Long-held stereotypes of stoicism and self-reliance among farmers were somewhat supported, in the context of mental health. Mental health services and professionals in rural Australia might need to adapt their practices to successfully engage this population.
Authors: Alison J Kennedy; Susan A Brumby; Vincent Lawrence Versace; Tristan Brumby-Rendell Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-05-29 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Kate M Gunn; Gemma Skaczkowski; James Dollman; Andrew D Vincent; Camille E Short; Susan Brumby; Alison Barrett; Nathan Harrison; Deborah Turnbull Journal: JMIR Hum Factors Date: 2022-01-11
Authors: Gemma Skaczkowski; Shannen van der Kruk; Sophie Loxton; Donna Hughes-Barton; Cate Howell; Deborah Turnbull; Neil Jensen; Matthew Smout; Kate Gunn Journal: JMIR Ment Health Date: 2022-02-08
Authors: Lina Braun; Ingrid Titzler; Yannik Terhorst; Johanna Freund; Janika Thielecke; David Daniel Ebert; Harald Baumeister Journal: Internet Interv Date: 2021-09-14
Authors: Melissa J Hull; Kate M Gunn; Ashleigh E Smith; Martin Jones; James Dollman Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-04 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Oscar Labra; Robin Wright; Gilles Tremblay; Danielle Maltais; Ray Bustinza; Gabriel Gingras-Lacroix Journal: Am J Mens Health Date: 2018-12-29
Authors: Janika Thielecke; Claudia Buntrock; Ingrid Titzler; Lina Braun; Johanna Freund; Matthias Berking; Harald Baumeister; David D Ebert Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Mark Schure; Bernadette McCrory; Kathryn Tuchscherer Franklin; John Greist; Ruth Striegel Weissman Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-10-02 Impact factor: 5.428