Search

Most studies highlighted the association between psychological distress and socioeconomic status (SES). There were weaker explanations for distress found in the middle classes, especially in Asian countries. We conducted a questionnaire survey with 1626 adult Chinese primary-care attenders from 13 private and 6 public clinics in different districts of Hong Kong. Their demographic background and distress level measured by GHQ-12 were analysed. We found that respondents with younger age, better education, and lower income were more likely to be distressed. In a multiple logistic regression model, age and income, but not education, were significant predictors for distress. Highest rates of distress were found among the unemployed (45.5%) and the students (37.1%), followed by service workers and shop sales workers (33.0%), associate professionals (32.0%), and clerks (29.2%). Craftworkers (9.1%), plant and machine operators (11.5%), and retired people (12.8%) were least likely to be distressed, followed by professionals (21.0%). Apart from SES, the findings suggest that young age, academic and job stressors, and low self-esteem are significant factors for distress. These factors may be intensified in a Chinese context by peer comparison resulting in a state of relative deprivation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dementia affects people worldwide and its prevalence is growing. Early detection of dementia by primary care physicians can be beneficial; thus, their knowledge and attitudes about this issue are important. Objective: To assess primary care physicians' knowledge and attitudes about the early detection of dementia in Hong Kong. Methods: This was a mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) study. Four focus groups with a purposive sample of 31 primary care physicians were interviewed, and a questionnaire-survey was completed and returned by 437 primary care physicians. Results: Participants all agreed that the early detection of dementia would benefit patients and primary care physicians should be capable of making such diagnoses. Confidence in making an early diagnosis varied; physicians tended to overlook symptoms in the early stages. All agreed that more training is needed at the post-graduate level of medical education. Conclusions: Participants had positive attitudes towards early detection of dementia; however, their confidence and ability to make an early diagnosis varied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most of the previous studies on help seeking for psychological distress were derived from Western countries. This study investigated the barriers to help-seeking for psychological distress among Chinese primary care attenders in Hong Kong.Methods: Nine focus groups and 6 individual interviews were conducted among Chinese primary care attenders with/without known distress, patients' significant others and the general public. The identified barriers were investigated in a questionnaire survey with data from 1626 primary care attenders recruited from 13 private clinics and 6 public clinics.Results: Worries about side effects of drugs (79.9%, 95% CI:(77.9%, 81.8%)) and drug dependency (74.7%, 95% CI:(72.5%, 76.8%)) were rated as the top barriers in the survey. Qualitative interviews found both worries and actual experience of the side effects of drugs, which weakened patients' trust in the treatment. Factor analysis on all barrier items suggested three factors: 1) worries of treatment, 2) uncertainties on primary care physicians' capacity, 3) public's limited knowledge on distress and sources of help. Distress level, education level and age were associated with factor 1, whereas distress level and healthcare setting were associated with the other two factors. Qualitative interviews revealed that not having a regular primary care physician in the public setting discouraged disclosure of psychological problems.Limitations: The findings were based on self-reported data from the respondents. Hong Kong is influenced by a mixed Chinese and Western culture.Conclusions: Relevant public education in a Chinese context should target at reducing patients' worries of drug treatment and strengthening the image of primary care physicians as a feasible source of help. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent studies have reported a lack of collaboration and consensus between primary care physicians (PCPs) and psychiatrists.Objective: To compare the views of PCPs and psychiatrists on managing common mental health problems in primary care.Methods: Four focus group interviews were conducted to explore the in-depth opinions of PCPs and psychiatrists in Hong Kong. The acceptance towards the proposed collaborative strategies from the focus groups were investigated in a questionnaire survey with data from 516 PCPs and 83 psychiatrists working in public and private sectors.Results: In the focus groups, the PCPs explained that several follow-up sessions to build up trust and enable the patients to accept their mental health problems were often needed before making referrals. Although some PCPs felt capable of managing common mental health problems, they had limited choices of psychiatric drugs to prescribe. Some public PCPs experienced the benefits of collaborative care, but most private PCPs perceived limited support from psychiatrists. The survey showed that around 90% of PCPs and public psychiatrists supported setting up an agreed protocol of care, management of common mental health problems by PCPs, and discharging stabilized patients to primary care. However, only around 54-67% of private psychiatrists supported different components of these strategies. Besides, less than half of the psychiatrists agreed with setting up a support hotline for the PCPs to consult them.Conclusions: The majority of PCPs and psychiatrists support management of common mental health problems in primary care, but there is significantly less support from the private psychiatrists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recent trend in health care system is to provide more choices to the patients. This study surveyed the general public's choices for primary care in Hong Kong which has the setting of free choices for private or public service and also direct access to specialists. We used a combined qualitative and quantitative approach. We held five focus group interviews with participants of different socio-economic categories. Information from the focus groups helped to design a questionnaire for random telephone interviews with members of the public aged 18 or above. There were 37 participants in the focus groups and 1647 respondents in the telephone survey. The most important factor for choosing a doctor was proximity to home or workplace, followed by quick relief from the illness. Once continuity of care had been established, distance was of less importance but comprehensive care was valued. Nearly 70% of the public had regular doctors. About 93% of the public would consult specialists directly when they thought they needed a specialist's opinion. Nearly 30% chose specialists for any medical care and 38% preferred specialists to also look after their primary care problems. Convenient accessibility was the most important factor for the initial choice of primary care doctors by the general public. The perceived clinical proficiency of the doctor determined future continuity of care. Patients liked to have direct access to specialists. Though some chose to see the specialists even for primary care problems, most people had regular doctors who were likely to have the attributes of family doctors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]