Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33227053›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of psychiatry2020

Organization of mental healthcare in Bosnia and Herzegovina during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Izet Pajević, Mevludin Hasanović, Esmina Avdibegović, Alma Džubur-Kulenović, Marija Burgić-Radmanović, Dragan Babić, Nermana Mehić-Basara, Nera Zivlak-Radulović, Goran Račetović

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Izet PajevićDepartment of Psychiatry, University Clinical Center Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Mevludin HasanovićDepartment of Psychiatry, University Clinical Center Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Esmina AvdibegovićDepartment of Psychiatry, University Clinical Center Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Alma Džubur-KulenovićDepartment of Psychiatry, Clinical Center of University Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Marija Burgić-RadmanovićDepartment of Psychiatry, University Clinical Center of Republic of Srpska, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Dragan BabićDepartment of Psychiatry, University Clinical Hospital of Mostar, Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Nermana Mehić-BasaraPublic Institute for Addiction Disorders of Canton Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Nera Zivlak-RadulovićDepartment of Psychiatry, University Clinical Center of Republic of Srpska, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Goran RačetovićCommunity Mental Health Center, Health Center Prijedor, Prijedor, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
University Clinical Center Tuzla · BAUniversity clinical center of Republika Srpska · BAUniversity Clinical Hospital Mostar · BAUniversity of Sarajevo · BA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), like any other pandemic, has imposed an unprecedented threat to physical and mental health to all nations, worldwide. There is no enough evidence in the literature in this area. The present study has been done to explore the organization of psychiatric services in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH) to meet mental health needs of BH citizens during the particular restrictive measures caused by COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS: This online survey has been done for BH psychiatric institutions. Data were collected from psychiatric institutions in the mental health network of BH. A total of 38 complete responses have been received.

resultsOf 38 study participants, three were the departments of psychiatry in university clinical centers, two were psychiatric hospitals, four were psychiatric wards in general hospitals, 27 were community mental health centers, and two were institutes for alcoholism and drug addiction. During the pandemic, all services functioned on a reduced scale, adhering to measures to protect and self-protect both staff and service users. Protective equipment was provided to staff in some institutions in a timely and complete manner and in some in an untimely and incomplete manner. Consultative psychiatric examinations were mainly performed through telephone and online, where it exists as a standard patient monitoring protocol. The application of long-acting antipsychotics was continuous with adherence to restricted and protective measures. In opiate addiction replacement therapy services, substitution therapy was provided for a longer period to reduce frequent contacts between staff and patients. Individual and group psychotherapy continued in reduced number using online technologies, although this type of service was not administratively regulated. An initiative has been given to regulate and administratively recognize telepsychiatry by health insurance funds in the country. A number of psychological problems associated with restrictive measures and fear of illness have been reported by patients as well as by the professionals in mental healthcare teams. There were no COVID-19-positive patients seeking help from institutions that responded to the questionnaire. In one center, infected people with COVID-19 from abroad sought help through the phone. Only one involuntary hospitalization was reported. The involvement of mental health professionals in the work of crisis headquarters during the design of the COVID-19 pandemic control measures varies from satisfactory to insufficient. Education of staff, patients, and citizens was regular with direct instructions through meetings, press, and electronic media.

conclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic in BH, all psychiatric services functioned on a reduced scale, adhering to measures to protect and self-protect staff and service users. All patients who asked for help have been adequately treated in direct inpatient or outpatient mental healthcare or online, despite telepsychiatric services not being recognized in health system in BH. There were neither infected patients nor staff with COVID-19 in the psychiatric institutions who responded in this research. A large-scale, multicenter study needs to be performed to get a broader picture and to guide us for future better service planning and delivery.

Indexed as

Attitude and practicecomorbiditiescoronavirus disease 2019online surveystress and depression

Identifiers

PMID33227053
PMCPMC7659768
OpenAlexW3090625177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.