Search

Only a small proportion of refugees requiring treatment actually receive psychotherapy. Alongside structural barriers, it has been hypothesized that causal attributions for mental health problems that deviate from Western explanatory models may reduce refugees' help-seeking behavior. Prevailing assumptions suggest that refugees predominantly hold causal beliefs that are incompatible with the rationales of psychotherapy. Testing these assumptions requires a reliable assessment tool to evaluate refugees' causal beliefs. Therefore, we developed the Causal Attributions for Mental Health Problems Scale (MH-CAUSE) and validated it in a sample of Middle Eastern refugees living in Germany (N = 429). The outcomes of the psychometric analysis, which included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency, and convergent validity, indicate that the MH-CAUSE is a suitable instrument for assessing refugees' causal beliefs about mental health problems. Our findings suggest that refugees' causal attributions are in line with a biopsychosocial-spiritual model of mental illness. Contrary to common assumptions, the majority of participants predominantly explained mental illness via psychosocial and biomedical causes, whereas spiritual beliefs were relevant only for a minority of participants. We observed significant associations between causal beliefs and help-seeking attitudes and behavior. However, effect sizes were only small to moderate. While mental health beliefs might contribute to mental health inequities, alleged cultural differences of refugees should not be overemphasized.

Background: Compared to the general German population, refugees in Germany are a high-risk group for trauma spectrum disorders. Currently, many barriers exist for the implementation of a screen-and-treat approach for mental disorders as part of the routine health care provision during the early stage of the immigration process. Objective: The aim of the present study was to develop and test a systematic screening approach to identify individual refugees in need of mental health care during the initial immigration phase. Method: 167 newly arrived refugees underwent a screening interview with the Refugee Health Screener (RHS) carried out by Intercultural Therapy Assistants (ITAs). The ITAs were super­vised by psychologists at a reception centre in Bielefeld, Germany. A subsample of 48 persons partici­pated in clinical validation interviews. Results: Findings demonstrated the need for and feasibility of a systematic screening during the initial immigration phase. However, established cut-off values of the RHS had to be adapted and the screening procedure had to be adjusted due to the needs of a significant number of refugees in severe psychological crises. Conclusion: A systematic screening that is applied shortly after arrival facilitates the early identification of refugees at risk of developing mental disorders and may be helpful to prevent chronic symptom development and an aggravation of psychological crises.

Populations in war-torn regions are exposed to a wide array of traumatic events that can cause an enormous psychological burden. Individual characteristics influence the likelihood of being exposed to certain events, pointing to systematic interindividual differences in trauma exposure. However, there is a dearth of studies examining potential patterns of trauma exposure in war regions. In this cross-sectional epidemiological study, we applied a person-centered approach to identify patterns in the exposure to conflict-related traumatic events and determine their impact on commonly reported mental health problems in a population-based sample (N ​= ​1000) from the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. We implemented multi-stage random cluster sampling to randomly select adults from 100 villages. Of 1000 adults (Mage ​= ​43.19 years) included in the study, 50% were female. Results showed high prevalence of PTSD (17.0%), depression (27.8%), anxiety (25.4%) and suicidality (15.1%) following exposure to conflict-related traumatic events since 2002. Latent Class Analysis identified three distinct classes of trauma exposure: Class 1 “low-trauma-exposure” (51.4%, n ​= ​514) was characterized by the lowest probabilities of trauma exposure. Class 2 “non-physical-trauma” (39.1%, n ​= ​391) consisted of individuals with a high probability for exposure to non-physical trauma types only. Class 3 “interpersonal-trauma” (9.5%, n ​= ​95) had the overall highest probability of exposure to traumatic events and was the only class affected by interpersonal-trauma types. Class membership was related to gender, age and place of living. Vulnerability to mental health problems increased from low-trauma-exposure to non-physical-trauma to interpersonal-trauma class. Our findings indicate that the exposure to traumatic events in conflict-affected populations underlies distinct patterns, with interpersonal trauma as a distinguishing marker. Vulnerability to psychopathology varies with trauma patterns, revealing patterns that include both non-physical and interpersonal traumata as most detrimental for mental health. Identification of underlying trauma patterns and their effects may improve mental health care in war-affected populations.