Journal of Neuropsychiatry

Description

Mental health service policies shift from a therapeutic focus focused on symptom relief based on the narrow concept of pathology and illness to a more comprehensive approach that considers well-being, recovery, social function and quality of life. Policies aimed at helping more people to recover and lead quality lives with mental health services require appropriate measurement of outcomes. However, such measures are standardized and very few are collected regularly in all mental health services.

A review of 11 devices for measuring quality of life for people with severe mental illness found that the most frequently evaluated areas were employment or work, health, leisure, living conditions and relationships. However, concerns have been expressed about the relative importance of domains measured on such instruments.

At the same time, the need for an economic assessment of mental health services is increasing. This allows EQ5D (measuring mobility, self-care, normal activity, pain / discomfort, anxiety / depression) and SF6D (physical function, disability, social function), pain, mental health and vitality). These measurements are also used to estimate scores that represent health-related quality of life. It is calculated on a scale where the quality-adjusted life years are 1 for perfect health and zero for as bad as the dead. However, these common measures are for people with the most serious mental health problems, especially psychosis and bipolar disorder. There is evidence that it is for. Limited evidence of suitability for people with anxiety and personality disorders. Some argue that these measures are designed primarily for use in the treatment of physical illnesses and therefore disproportionately emphasize pain and disability compared to mental health.

Quality of life measurements have also been criticized as being drawn from the perspective of a psychiatrist, rather than taking into account what people with mental health problems consider important to quality of life. It is recognized that the views of healthcare service users should play a central role in the development and review of outcome indicators reported by patients (US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 2009).

Importance of quality of life for people with mental health as part of a large study investigating the adequacy of general preference-based interventions for people with mental health problems A systematic review of qualitative studies on health issues. We have identified six areas of quality of life. Control, autonomy, choice. Self-awareness; affiliation; activity; and hope and despair. One of the limitations of the review was that the available studies focused on severe and persistent mental health problems, especially the quality of life of people with schizophrenia. To complete the review, we conducted a primary survey of people with severe and persistent mental health problems and mild to moderate general mental health problems. This raised most of the concerns about the adequacy of preference-based interventions in this group, so look at how the reviews addressed important aspects of quality of life for people with serious mental health problems. Current evidence is based on the views of people who are not so seriously problematic.

Theory

One approach, called engaged theory, asserts four domains in judging quality of life: environment, economics, politics, and culture, as articulated in the journal of Applied Research in the Quality of Life.

For example, the domain of culture contains the following subcategories of quality of life

1. Ideas and beliefs

2. Recreation and creativity

3. Inquiry and education

4. Generations and gender

5. Identity and participation

6. Projection and memory

Health and well-being: Other frequently connected notions in this framework are freedom, human rights, and happiness. However, because happiness is subjective and difficult to quantify, other metrics are usually prioritised. It has also been demonstrated that happiness, to the extent that it can be quantified, does not always increase in lockstep with the increased comfort that comes with increased income. As a result, one's standard of life should not be used to determine happiness.

Measurement of Quality of Life: There are various types of quality-of-life indicators. These include generic measures, which are designed to assess health-related quality of life in any group of patients (or, indeed, in any population sample); diseasespecific measures, such as those that assess health-related quality of life in specific illness groups; and individualised measures, which allow for the inclusion of aspects of life that are important to individual patients. The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), and the 36- item Short Form Health Survey are examples of quality-of-life measurements (SF-36). These indicators include a wide variety of aspects of life that might be harmed by illness, including bodily function, mental well-being, and the ability to work and participate in social activities. The Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS), the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), the Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP), and the 40- item Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Assessment are examples of disease-specific measures.

Uses: Quality-of-life data has a wide range of applications, but the most prevalent are the evaluation of treatment regimens in clinical trials and health surveys. Population and patient monitoring, screening, and improved doctor-patient communication are some of the other applications. However, one of the most important uses of such data is in the economic evaluation of health care, with certain measures built expressly for use in cost-utility studies that is, calculations that aim to determine the advantages of an intervention in terms of both length and quality of life gained. The five dimensions are broken down into sublevels of patient-perceived difficulties (e.g., "no problems," "severe problems"), from which a health condition (or health profile) can be calculated. The significance of health values.