Deborah Oyine Aluh, Daniel Ifeanyichukwu Agu, Wisdom Joe Igbokwe, Ifunanya Genevieve Anunwa
{"title":"公众对尼日利亚精神卫生保健中强制措施的接受程度。","authors":"Deborah Oyine Aluh, Daniel Ifeanyichukwu Agu, Wisdom Joe Igbokwe, Ifunanya Genevieve Anunwa","doi":"10.1177/00207640241296050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For the first time, Nigeria has enacted a new mental health law that regulates the use of coercive measures in mental health care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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%, <i>n</i> = 400), and he should be forced to take medications at the psychiatric hospital (55.1%, <i>n</i> = 339). The least accepted coercive measure was Isolation (28.8%, <i>n</i> = 177). There were significant associations between social distance and the acceptance of involuntary admissions, forced medication, mechanical restraints, and isolation (<i>p</i> < .05). Social distance score was highest among respondents who agreed that the vignette character should be isolated (24.023 ± 5.503; <i>F</i> = 24.672, <i>p</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","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":"{\"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\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For the first time, Nigeria has enacted a new mental health law that regulates the use of coercive measures in mental health care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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%, <i>n</i> = 400), and he should be forced to take medications at the psychiatric hospital (55.1%, <i>n</i> = 339). The least accepted coercive measure was Isolation (28.8%, <i>n</i> = 177). There were significant associations between social distance and the acceptance of involuntary admissions, forced medication, mechanical restraints, and isolation (<i>p</i> < .05). Social distance score was highest among respondents who agreed that the vignette character should be isolated (24.023 ± 5.503; <i>F</i> = 24.672, <i>p</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"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}","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}
Public acceptance of coercive measures in Nigerian mental health care.
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.
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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
