Public acceptance of coercive measures in Nigerian mental health care.

IF 2.5 4区医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY

International Journal of Social Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1177/00207640241296050

Deborah Oyine Aluh, Daniel Ifeanyichukwu Agu, Wisdom Joe Igbokwe, Ifunanya Genevieve Anunwa

{"title":"Public acceptance of coercive measures in Nigerian mental health care.","authors":"Deborah Oyine Aluh, Daniel Ifeanyichukwu Agu, Wisdom Joe Igbokwe, Ifunanya Genevieve Anunwa","doi":"10.1177/00207640241296050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: For the first time, Nigeria has enacted a new mental health law that regulates the use of coercive measures in mental health care.Aim: The study aimed to investigate the extent to which the Nigerian public accepts the use of coercive measures in the treatment of people with mental health conditions and to understand the impact of stigma and other sociodemographic characteristics.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 615 adult respondents from Nigeria's six geopolitical zones. The study instrument included a case-specific vignette, a social distance scale, and a brief sociodemographic form. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted with SPSS v.25 software.Results: More than half of the study respondents agreed that the vignette character should be forced to go to the hospital if he refuses to go (65%, n = 400), and he should be forced to take medications at the psychiatric hospital (55.1%, n = 339). The least accepted coercive measure was Isolation (28.8%, n = 177). There were significant associations between social distance and the acceptance of involuntary admissions, forced medication, mechanical restraints, and isolation (p < .05). Social distance score was highest among respondents who agreed that the vignette character should be isolated (24.023 ± 5.503; F = 24.672, p < .001).Conclusions: The study highlights variations in public attitudes toward coercive psychiatric measures, within the Nigerian context compared to other countries. The lower acceptance rates for isolation as a coercive measure underscore the cultural importance of social interaction in Nigeria. The relatively recent implementation of Nigeria's Mental Health Act also suggests a potential gap in public knowledge regarding the criteria for coercive measures. Future research should aim to include diverse populations and consider longitudinal approaches to assess changes in public attitudes as awareness of mental health legislation increases.","PeriodicalId":14304,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"207640241296050"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640241296050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For the first time, Nigeria has enacted a new mental health law that regulates the use of coercive measures in mental health care.

Aim: The study aimed to investigate the extent to which the Nigerian public accepts the use of coercive measures in the treatment of people with mental health conditions and to understand the impact of stigma and other sociodemographic characteristics.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 615 adult respondents from Nigeria's six geopolitical zones. The study instrument included a case-specific vignette, a social distance scale, and a brief sociodemographic form. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted with SPSS v.25 software.

Results: More than half of the study respondents agreed that the vignette character should be forced to go to the hospital if he refuses to go (65%, n = 400), and he should be forced to take medications at the psychiatric hospital (55.1%, n = 339). The least accepted coercive measure was Isolation (28.8%, n = 177). There were significant associations between social distance and the acceptance of involuntary admissions, forced medication, mechanical restraints, and isolation (p < .05). Social distance score was highest among respondents who agreed that the vignette character should be isolated (24.023 ± 5.503; F = 24.672, p < .001).

Conclusions: The study highlights variations in public attitudes toward coercive psychiatric measures, within the Nigerian context compared to other countries. The lower acceptance rates for isolation as a coercive measure underscore the cultural importance of social interaction in Nigeria. The relatively recent implementation of Nigeria's Mental Health Act also suggests a potential gap in public knowledge regarding the criteria for coercive measures. Future research should aim to include diverse populations and consider longitudinal approaches to assess changes in public attitudes as awareness of mental health legislation increases.

查看原文本刊更多论文

公众对尼日利亚精神卫生保健中强制措施的接受程度。

研究背景目的：本研究旨在调查尼日利亚公众在多大程度上接受在治疗精神疾病患者时使用强制措施，并了解耻辱感和其他社会人口特征的影响：对来自尼日利亚六个地缘政治区的 615 名成年受访者进行了横断面调查。研究工具包括一个针对具体病例的小故事、一个社会距离量表和一份简要的社会人口学表格。使用 SPSS v.25 软件进行了描述性和推论性统计：半数以上的受访者同意，如果小故事中的人物拒绝去医院，就应该强迫他去（65%，n = 400），而且应该强迫他在精神病院服药（55.1%，n = 339）。最不被接受的强制措施是隔离（28.8%，n = 177）。社会距离与非自愿入院、强制服药、机械束缚和隔离的接受度之间存在显着关联（p F = 24.672，p 结论：社会距离与非自愿入院、强制服药、机械束缚和隔离的接受度之间存在显着关联：与其他国家相比，这项研究凸显了尼日利亚公众对强制性精神病治疗措施的不同态度。隔离作为一种强制措施的接受率较低，这凸显了社会交往在尼日利亚文化中的重要性。尼日利亚《精神健康法》的实施时间相对较短，这也表明公众对强制措施标准的认识可能存在差距。未来的研究应旨在纳入不同的人群，并考虑采用纵向方法来评估公众态度随着对心理健康立法认识的提高而发生的变化。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Journal of Social Psychiatry PSYCHIATRY-

CiteScore

12.30

自引率

1.30%

发文量

120

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, established in 1954, is a leading publication dedicated to the field of social psychiatry. It serves as a platform for the exchange of research findings and discussions on the influence of social, environmental, and cultural factors on mental health and well-being. The journal is particularly relevant to psychiatrists and multidisciplinary professionals globally who are interested in understanding the broader context of psychiatric disorders and their impact on individuals and communities. Social psychiatry, as a discipline, focuses on the origins and outcomes of mental health issues within a social framework, recognizing the interplay between societal structures and individual mental health. The journal draws connections with related fields such as social anthropology, cultural psychiatry, and sociology, and is influenced by the latest developments in these areas. The journal also places a special emphasis on fast-track publication for brief communications, ensuring that timely and significant research can be disseminated quickly. Additionally, it strives to reflect its international readership by publishing state-of-the-art reviews from various regions around the world, showcasing the diverse practices and perspectives within the psychiatric disciplines. This approach not only contributes to the scientific understanding of social psychiatry but also supports the global exchange of knowledge and best practices in mental health care.