Search results

This article discusses the state of the art concerning the meaning and value of model programmes in mental health promotion and mental disorder prevention. Model programmes are considered an important instrument for improving the quality, social impact and cost‐effectiveness of promotion and prevention. However, there is a lack of conceptual clarity and insight in the processes and mechanisms for successful use of model programmes in this field. This article offers a further clarification of the concept of model programmes and discusses its pros and cons and current views on the process of programme development and programme use. The discussion will be based particularly on recent experiences with model programmes in Europe. Until recently, prevention research was directed mainly at the design and testing of new model programmes. However, successful use of the ‘model programme strategy’ requires more attention to the pre‐conditions for effective dissemination, adoption and implementation of model programmes. Only when this multi‐phased process is taken into account and the required pre‐conditions and quality criteria are specified can one expect that model programmes will be more effective at a community level. The consequences of this view for prevention science and prevention research policies are discussed. To implement such a multi‐phased process successfully, not only are conceptual clarity and a scientific underpinning crucial, but also collaborative organisational structures are needed at national and international level if the range of complementary tasks is to be executed effectively and efficiently.

These are exciting times for prevention and promotion in mental health at the European level, writes Eva Jané‐Llopis. We have a European Commission mental health green paper; we also have WHO commitment to support member states to develop mental health policies and put them into practice. But support and engagement from practitioners and policy makers will be crucial to take forward mental health promotion on the ground, and a greater focus is needed on evidence based interventions and the evaluation of programmes and practice if the momentum is to be sustained.

This paper uses economic analysis to develop the case for greater investment in mental health promotion. One example of a common mental health problem for which there is robust evidence of effective interventions is conduct disorder. The paper estimates that preventing conduct disorders in those children who are most disturbed would save around £150,000 per case (lifetime costs), and that promoting positive mental health in those children with moderate mental health would yield lifetime benefits of around £75,000 per case. Investment in support for parents is therefore the top priority in a provisional list of ‘best buys’ in promoting mental health.

There is a growing policy imperative to promote positive mental health as well as prevent the development of mental health problems in children. This paper summarises the findings of published systematic reviews evaluating such interventions. A search was undertaken of ten electronic databases using a combination of medical subject headings (MeSH) and free text searches. Systematic reviews covering mental health promotion or mental illness prevention interventions aimed at infants, children or young people up to age 19 were included. Reviews of drug and alcohol prevention programmes and programmes to prevent childhood abuse and neglect were excluded because these have been the subject of recent good quality reviews of reviews. A total of 27 systematic reviews were included. These targeted a range of risk and protective factors, and a range of populations (including parents and children). While many lacked methodological rigour, overall the evidence is strongly suggestive of the effectiveness of a range of interventions in promoting positive mental well‐being, and reducing key risk factors for mental illness in children. Based on this evidence, arguments are advanced for the preferential provision of early preventive programmes.

This paper, which builds on the findings of WHO's Report on Mental Health and Development, aims to highlight the health, social, economic, and human rights effects of unaddressed mental disorders in low and middle income countries (LMICs) and to propose effective strategies to address mental disorders and their impacts as part of an overall development strategy.

The paper first reviews the findings of relevant research on mental disorders and poverty and then proposes solutions that can be adopted by countries to promote development.

This evidence of strong links between poverty and mental disorder supports the argument that mental disorders should be an important concern for development strategies. Mental disorders have diverse and far‐reaching social impacts, including homelessness, higher rates of imprisonment, poor educational opportunities and outcomes, lack of employment and reduced income. Targeted poverty alleviation programmes are needed to break the cycle between mental illness and poverty. These must include measures specifically addressing the needs of people with mental health conditions, such as the provision of accessible and effective services and support, facilitation of education, employment opportunities and housing, and enforcement of human rights protection.

The paper highlights that four out of every five people suffering from mental disorders are living in LMICs. Many LMICs have identified mental health as an important issue, yet lack the finances and technical expertise to address the problem. Having mental health on the agenda of development organizations will be a critical step for overcoming the negative development consequences of mental disorders.

Public schools possess a unique constellation of opportunities and challenges for mental health service provision. Schools, as settings within a larger ecological context, can be a community institution that supports a child as s/he develops assets for resilient development while providing opportunities for a range of life choices. School is the setting where children can learn and practice peer relations and social norms, and it can be a refuge where children who have many environmental risks can find structure and effective methods of success (Doll, 1999). When Willie Horton, the infamous bank robber, was asked why he robbed banks, he responded, “Because that's where the money is.” At a most basic level, schools are where the children are. Every day more than 52 million students attend over 1,14,000 schools in the United States, and including the 6 million adult staff, this amounts to almost one-fifth of the population passing through the Nation's schools on any given weekday (New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, 2003).

Slovenia regained its independence in 1991, and in 2004 became a member of the European Union. Despite some progress in public health policy and practice, mental health has so far barely featured. Mental health literacy is poor, mental health services remain firmly rooted in the medical, institutional model, and public attitudes to mental ill health are predominantly negative. But Tanja Kamin here identifies some key opportunities that may lead to a greater emphasis on prevention of mental ill health and promotion of mental well‐being across the whole population.