Hotspot Zuidplaspolder: Climate adaptation in the Zuidplaspolder

Building at the lowest point in the Netherlands, in the Zuidplaspolder, is viewed as a challenge and not something that is impossible. The Xplorelab approach in the Hotspot Zuidplaspolder project is a combination of research, implementation of ideas into inspiring examples and evaluation

Risk of criminal victimisation in outpatients with common mental health disorders

Crime victimisation is a serious problem in psychiatric patients. However, research has focused on patients with severe mental illness and few studies exist that address victimisation in other outpatient groups, such as patients with depression. Due to large differences in methodology of the studies that address crime victimisation, a comparison of prevalence between psychiatric diagnostic groups is hard to make. Objectives of this study were to determine and compare one-year prevalence of violent and non-violent criminal victimisation among outpatients from different diagnostic psychiatric groups and to examine prevalence differences with the general population.Criminal victimisation prevalence was measured in 300 outpatients living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with outpatients with depressive disorder (n = 102), substance use disorder (SUD, n = 106) and severe mental illness (SMI, n = 92) using a National Crime Victimisation Survey, and compared with a matched general population sample (n = 10865).Of all outpatients, 61% reported experiencing some kind of victimisation over the past year; 33% reported violent victimisation (3.5 times more than the general population) and 36% reported property crimes (1.2 times more than the general population). Outpatients with depression (67%) and SUD (76%) were victimised more often than SMI outpatients (39%). Younger age and hostile behaviour were associated with violent victimisation, while being male and living alone were associated with non-violent victimisation. Moreover, SUD was associated with both violent and non-violent victimisation.Outpatients with depression, SUD, and SMI are at increased risk of victimisation compared to the general population. Furthermore, our results indicate that victimisation of violent and non-violent crimes is more common in outpatients with depression and SUD than in outpatients with SMI living independently in the community

Alcohol use disorder treatment via video conferencing treatment compared with in-person therapy during COVID-19 social distancing measures: a non-inferiority comparison of three cohorts

Stress and Psychopatholog

Psychiatric disorders and urbanization in Germany

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Epidemiological studies over the last decade have supplied growing evidence of an association between urbanization and the prevalence of psychiatric disorders. Our aim was to examine the link between levels of urbanization and 12-month prevalence rates of psychiatric disorders in a nationwide German population study, controlling for other known risk factors such as gender, social class, marital status and the interaction variables of these factors with urbanization.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Munich Composite International Diagnostic Interview (M-CIDI) was used to assess the prevalence of mental disorders (DSM-IV) in a representative sample of the German population (N = 4181, age: 18–65). The sample contains five levels of urbanization based on residence location.</p> <p>The epidemiological study was commissioned by the German Ministry of Research, Education and Science (BMBF) and approved by the relevant Institutional Review Board and ethics committee. Written informed consent was obtained for both surveys (core survey and Mental Health Supplement). Subjects did not get any financial compensation for their study participation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Higher levels of urbanization were linked to higher 12-month prevalence rates for almost all major psychiatric disorders (with the exception of substance abuse and psychotic disorders). The weighted prevalence percentages were highest in the most urbanized category. Alongside urbanization, female gender, lower social class and being unmarried were generally found to be associated with higher levels of psychopathology. The impact of urbanization on mental health was about equal (for almost all major psychiatric disorders) in young people and elderly people, men and women, and in married and single people. Only people from a low social class in the most urbanized settings had more somatoform disorders, and unmarried people in the most urbanized settings had more anxiety disorders.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Psychiatric disorders are more prevalent among the inhabitants of more urbanized areas. probably because of environmental stressors.</p

Victimization of patients with severe psychiatric disorders: prevalence, risk factors, protective factors and consequences for mental health. A longitudinal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Victimization among people with a Severe Mental Illness is a common phenomenon. The objectives of this study proposal are: to delineate the extent and kind of victimization in a representative sample of chronic psychiatric patients; to contribute to the development and validation of a set of instruments registering victimization of psychiatric patients; to determine risk factors and protective factors; and to gain insight into the possible consequences of victimization.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>An extensive data set of 323 patients with Sever Mental Illness (assessed 4 years ago) is used. In 2010 a second measurement will be performed, enabling longitudinal research on the predictors and consequences of victimization.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The consequences of (re)victimization have barely been subjected to analysis, partially due to the lack of a comprehensive, conceptual model for victimization. This research project will contribute significantly to the scientific development of the conceptual model of victimization in chronic psychiatric patients.</p

Формування світогляду О. Кониського

Crime victimisation is a serious problem in psychiatric patients. However, research has focused on patients with severe mental illness and few studies exist that address victimisation in other outpatient groups, such as patients with depression. Due to large differences in methodology of the studies that address crime victimisation, a comparison of prevalence between psychiatric diagnostic groups is hard to make. Objectives of this study were to determine and compare one-year prevalence of violent and non-violent criminal victimisation among outpatients from different diagnostic psychiatric groups and to examine prevalence differences with the general population.Criminal victimisation prevalence was measured in 300 outpatients living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with outpatients with depressive disorder (n = 102), substance use disorder (SUD, n = 106) and severe mental illness (SMI, n = 92) using a National Crime Victimisation Survey, and compared with a matched general population sample (n = 10865).Of all outpatients, 61% reported experiencing some kind of victimisation over the past year; 33% reported violent victimisation (3.5 times more than the general population) and 36% reported property crimes (1.2 times more than the general population). Outpatients with depression (67%) and SUD (76%) were victimised more often than SMI outpatients (39%). Younger age and hostile behaviour were associated with violent victimisation, while being male and living alone were associated with non-violent victimisation. Moreover, SUD was associated with both violent and non-violent victimisation.Outpatients with depression, SUD, and SMI are at increased risk of victimisation compared to the general population. Furthermore, our results indicate that victimisation of violent and non-violent crimes is more common in outpatients with depression and SUD than in outpatients with SMI living independently in the community

Effect of coercive measures on treatment outcome in involuntarily admitted patients in Amsterdam

ObjectiveThe prevalence of involuntary admissions rose the last forty years in European countries, including the Netherlands. Involuntary admissions result in seclusion, physical restraint and forced medication in approximately 40% of patients. We looked at whether treatment outcomes differ in patients with and without coercive measures.MethodsUsing The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) to measure treatment outcomes, we studied the files of 786 patients admitted involuntarily to an Amsterdam clinic. We applied Generalised Linear Models to determine whether the use, or not, of coercive measures during treatment was associated with a difference in outcomes.Results19% of the cohort were secluded in a High Security Room (HSR); 24% were secluded in their own room and/or received forced medication. After adjustment for the influence of diagnosis, disorder severity (initial HoNOS score) and treatment duration, the HSR group had, on average, a HoNOS difference score that was 2.4 points lower than patients without coercive measures (CI −4.0 to −0.8.; p 0.003). In the seclusion in own room group, this score was 2.6 points lower (CI −4.0 to −1.1; p 0.001), corresponding to an effect size of 0.35 and 0.40, respectively.ConclusionSeclusion, whether or not in combination with forced medication, was applied to two-fifths of patients. The HoNOS scores of the group without coercion improved by nearly two and a half points more on average than those of the two groups with coercion. A causal relationship between coercion and treatment outcome could neither be confirmed nor excluded on the basis of our results

Sensitivity and specificity of the Major Depression Inventory in outpatients

.001). Subjects with major depressive disorder (MDD) had a significantly higher MDI score than subjects with anxiety disorders (but no MDD), dysthymias, bipolar, psychotic, other neurotic disorders, and subjects with relational problems. In ROC analysis we found that the area under the curve was 0.68 for the MDI. A good cut-off point for the MDI seems to be 26, with a sensitivity of 0.66, and a specificity of 0.63. The indication of the presence of MDD based on the MDI had a moderate agreement with the diagnosis made by a psychiatrist (kappa: 0.26). Conclusion The MDI is an attractive, brief depression inventory, which seems to be a reliable tool for assessing depression in psychiatric outpatients