Public mental health services in Southern China and related health outcomes among individuals living with severe mental illness
Dan Qiu,Yilu Li,Shuiyuan Xiao,Liang Zhou,Lianzhong Liu,Huiming Liu,Feihong Gao,Qiuyan Wu,Yanni An,Zixuan Tang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-024-00363-0
2024-08-29
Abstract:Background: Although national policies in China are comprehensive and instructive, a wide disparity exists between different cities. The current status of public mental health services by region in China remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate policies related to public mental health services, the contact coverage of public mental health services and outcomes of service users. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in Southern China, between April 2021 and March 2022. Considering the geographical location, socioeconomic development levels, and prevalence of severe mental illness, four cities including Wuhan, Changsha, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen were selected. Relevant service providers were asked to report data on mental health policies and facility-related information, including mental health resources, registration rates of patients, management rates of patients, and medication rates of patients. Eligible patients were invited to report service user-related data, including contact coverage of public mental health services and their outcomes. SPSS 26.0 was used for data analysis. Results: The four cities in Southern China have made different efforts to develop public mental health services, primarily focusing on socio-economically disadvantaged individuals. Community health centers in Guangzhou and Shenzhen reported having more professional human resources on mental health and higher mental health budgets for patients. The contact coverage rates of most public mental services were higher than 80%. Patients in Changsha (B = 0.3; 95%CI: 0.1-0.5), Guangzhou (B = 0.2; 95%CI: 0.1-0.3), and Shenzhen (B = 0.3; 95%CI: 0.1-0.4) who received social medical assistance services reported higher levels of medication adherence. Patients in Wuhan (B = -6.5; 95%CI: -12.9--0.1), Guangzhou (B = -2.8; 95%CI: -5.5--0.1), and Shenzhen who received community-based rehabilitation services reported lower levels of disability (B = -2.6; 95%CI: -4.6--0.5). Conclusions: There have been advances in public mental health services in the four Southern cities. The contact coverage rates of most public mental health services were higher than 80%. Patients' utilization of public mental services was associated with better health outcomes. To improve the quality of public mental health services, the government should try to engage service users, their family members, and supporters in the design, delivery, operationalization, and evaluation of these public mental health services in the future.