Search results

Engaging with heritage to support mental health and wellbeing has become a focus of research and policy, more recently moving towards social prescription of heritage interventions. While there are benefits to active participation, there are potential risks to those taking part and to the non-renewable historic remains and landscape that form the core of these projects. The purpose of the current research paper was to develop best practice guidelines for organisations offering heritage projects as interventions for people who live with mental health issues to protect both participants and heritage.

There were two research phases; a Sandpit with World Café discussions to produce a set of research priorities, and a Delphi Consultation, using three questionnaires distributed over six months, to develop best practice guidelines. The panel in both phases comprised experts through lived experience, policy, practice and research.

The Authentic and Meaningful Participation in Heritage or Related Activities (AMPHORA) guidelines cover three stages: project development, project delivery and project follow-up, with a set of action points for each stage. Of particular importance was authentic participation and expertise to ensure appropriate management of heritage/ historic environment assets and support for participants.

The AMPHORA guidelines can assist all organisations in the delivery of safe projects that support the mental health of those involved, as well as enhancing and protecting the historic environment.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, these are the first research-led guidelines that help heritage organisations support those living with mental health issues.

The institutional conditions of primary care provision remain understudied in low- and middle-income countries. This study analyzes how primary care doctors cope with medical uncertainty in municipal clinics in urban India. As street-level bureaucrats, the municipal doctors occupy two roles simultaneously: medical professional and state agent. They operate under conditions that characterize health systems in low-resource contexts globally: inadequate state investment, weak regulation and low societal trust. The study investigates how, in these conditions, the doctors respond to clinical risk, specifically related to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).

The analysis draws on year-long ethnographic fieldwork in Pune (2013–14), a city of three million, including 30 semi-structured interviews with municipal doctors.

Interpreting their municipal mandate to exclude NCDs and reasoning their medical expertise as insufficient to treat NCDs, the doctors routinely referred NCD cases. They expressed concerns about violence from patients, negative media attention and unsupportive municipal authorities should anything go wrong clinically.

The study contextualizes street-level service-delivery in weak institutional conditions. Whereas street-level workers may commonly standardize practices to reduce workload, here the doctors routinized NCD care to avoid the sociopolitical consequences of clinical uncertainty. Modalities of the welfare state and medical care in India – manifest in weak municipal capacity and healthcare regulation – appear to compel restraint in service-delivery. The analysis highlights how norms and social relations may shape primary care provision and quality.

This study aims to investigate how institutional and organisational factors affect case management of patients with mental disorders by GPs in Italy and Spain. The paper highlights the importance of improving the effectiveness of primary care to ensure easy access to mental health services, which is crucial in responding to the increasing incidence of mental disorders and preventing negative outcomes.

This article details a qualitative research study that examines the management of patients with mental disorders by general practitioners (GPs) in Italy and Spain, using cross-national comparison and in-depth interviews with GPs as research methods.

The study revealed that Italian self-employed GPs have more scheduling autonomy than Spanish Health Centre GPs. Both face high work pressure and resource scarcity, highlighting the need for targeted training. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rise in phone consultations.

This study provides novel insights into mental health management by examining the case management of patients with mental disorders by GPs in Italy and Spain, with a focus on the impact of institutional and organisational factors. The cross-national comparison and in-depth interviews enhance the originality of the study, offering a nuanced understanding of the constraints faced by GPs in their work context. Furthermore, the comparison of the similar primary care frameworks of Italy and Spain may offer insight into their evolution.