Article

Randomized controlled trial of the self-stigma reduction program among individuals with schizophrenia

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
Psychiatry Research (Impact Factor: 2.68). 03/2011; 189(2):208-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2011.02.013
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Research evidence suggests that individuals with schizophrenia are prone to self-stigmatization, which reduces their psychosocial treatment adherence. A self-stigma reduction program was developed based on a theoretical framework proposed by our team. The effectiveness of such program to reduce self-stigma, enhance readiness for change, and promote adherent behaviors among individuals with schizophrenia was investigated. This program consisted of 12 group and four individual follow-up sessions. An integrative approach including psychoeductaion, cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing, social skills training, and goal attainment program was adopted. Sixty-six self-stigmatized individuals with schizophrenia were recruited. They were randomly allocated to the self-stigma reduction program (N=34; experimental protocol) or the newspaper reading group (N=32; comparison protocol). Measures on participants' level of self-stigma, readiness for change, insight, general self-efficacy, and treatment adherence were taken for six assessment intervals. The findings suggested that the self-stigma reduction program has potential to reduce self-esteem decrement, promote readiness for changing own problematic behaviors, and enhance psychosocial treatment adherence among the self-stigmatized individuals with schizophrenia during the active interventional stage. However, there was a lack of therapeutic maintenance effects during the 6-month follow-up period. Recommendations for further improving the effectiveness of self-stigma reduction program are suggested.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
120 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The stigma associated with mental disorders is a global public health problem. Programs to combat it must be informed by the best available evidence. To this end, a meta-analysis was undertaken to investigate the effectiveness of existing programs. A systematic search of PubMed, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases yielded 34 relevant papers, comprising 33 randomized controlled trials. Twenty-seven papers (26 trials) contained data that could be incorporated into a quantitative analysis. Of these trials, 19 targeted personal stigma or social distance (6,318 participants), six addressed perceived stigma (3,042 participants) and three self-stigma (238 participants). Interventions targeting personal stigma or social distance yielded small but significant reductions in stigma across all mental disorders combined (d=0.28, 95% CI: 0.17-0.39, p<0.001) as well as for depression (d=0.36, 95% CI: 0.10-0.60, p<0.01), psychosis (d=0.20, 95% CI: 0.06-0.34, p<0.01) and generic mental illness (d=0.30, 95% CI: 0.10-0.50, p<0.01). Educational interventions were effective in reducing personal stigma (d=0.33, 95% CI: 0.19-0.42, p<0.001) as were interventions incorporating consumer contact (d=0.47, 95% CI: 0.17-0.78, p<0.001), although there were insufficient studies to demonstrate an effect for consumer contact alone. Internet programs were at least as effective in reducing personal stigma as face-to-face delivery. There was no evidence that stigma interventions were effective in reducing perceived or self-stigma. In conclusion, there is an evidence base to inform the roll out of programs for improving personal stigma among members of the community. However, there is a need to investigate methods for improving the effectiveness of these programs and to develop interventions that are effective in reducing perceived and internalized stigma.
    World psychiatry: official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) 06/2014; 13(2):161-75. DOI:10.1002/wps.20129 · 12.85 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We aimed to examine internalized stigma of patients with mental illness in Korea and identify the contributing factors to internalized stigma among socio-demographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables using a cross-sectional study design. A total of 160 patients were recruited from a university mental hospital. We collected socio-demographic data, clinical variables and administered self-report scales to measure internalized stigma and levels of self-esteem, hopelessness, social support, and social conflict. Internalized stigma was identified in 8.1% of patients in our sample. High internalized stigma was independently predicted by low self-esteem, high hopelessness, and high social conflict among the psychosocial variables. Our finding suggests that simple psychoeducation only for insight gaining cannot improve internalized stigma. To manage internalized stigma in mentally ill patients, it is needed to promote hope and self-esteem. We also suggest that a relevant psychosocial intervention, such as developing coping skills for social conflict with family, can help patients overcome their internalized stigma. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Psychiatry Research 12/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.071 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: With growing awareness of the impact of mental illness self-stigma, interest has arisen in the development of interventions to combat it. The present article briefly reviews and compares interventions targeting self-stigma to clarify the similarities and important differences between the interventions. Method: We conducted a narrative review of published literature on interventions targeting self-stigma. Results: Six intervention approaches (Healthy Self-Concept, Self-Stigma Reduction Program, Ending Self-Stigma, Narrative Enhancement and Cognitive Therapy, Coming Out Proud, and Anti-Stigma Photo-Voice Intervention) were identified and are discussed, and data is reviewed on format, group-leader backgrounds, languages, number of sessions, primary mechanisms of action, and the current state of data on their efficacy. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: We conclude with a discussion of common elements and important distinctions between the interventions and a consideration of which interventions might be best suited to particular populations or settings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
    Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 10/2014; DOI:10.1037/prj0000100 · 0.75 Impact Factor