Search

Background Dual diagnosis (DD) refers to the coexistence of intellectual disability and psychiatric disorder. In order to provide individuals with DD with adequate care, it is essential for mental health workers to have adequate knowledge and positive attitudes. These may be achieved through proper training. Aims To summarise the available literature examining the knowledge, attitudes and training of psychiatrists and other professional caregivers in regard to serving people with DD. Methods A search strategy was developed to find manuscripts published in English since 1995. Results Twenty-seven studies on knowledge, attitudes and training in the field of DD were identified and reviewed in this paper. Conclusion The findings of this review stress the need to improve the knowledge, competence and attitudes of practitioners within the DD field via training and practice opportunities. In light of this review, recommendations for improving training opportunities and for conducting future research are made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The purpose of this review is to report on existing literature regarding children and adolescents younger than 16 years of age experiencing a first-episode psychiatric disturbance. Rather than providing a comprehensive list of service implications, this paper identifies some of the gaps in knowledge and practice to encourage ongoing analysis regarding better practices for early intervention for children and adolescents experiencing a first-episode psychiatric disturbance. Methods: A search was conducted to identify key evidence-based literature published from 1985 to 2007 discussing various aspects of child and youth mental health in Canada, the USA, the UK, Australia and New Zealand. The review also included ‘grey’ literature. Categories of information include diagnoses, pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, prevalence, environmental and other risk factors, and demographic variables. Results: Understanding first-episode psychiatric disturbance for patients under the age of 16 years is limited because of a scarcity of controlled studies focusing on this population. Programme evaluations are sparse, perhaps because of the small number of specialized units servicing this population. It may be helpful to enlist early intervention psychosis programmes that have been successful in assisting young people aged 16–24 in the development of better practices and care outcomes for younger age groups. Conclusions: The authors highlight information that has the potential to assist in optimizing care for those youth younger than 16 years experiencing or exhibiting signs of a first-episode psychiatric disturbance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]