Development of disaster mental health guidelines through the Delphi process in Japan

International Journal of Mental Health Systems

Yoshiharu Kim¹  Tomomi Narisawa²  Satomi Nakajima²  Maiko Fukasawa¹  Yuriko Suzuki² 

[1] National Information Center of Disaster Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, 4-1-1 Ogawa-Higashi, Kodaira, Tokyo, 187-8553, Japan;Department of Adult Mental Health and National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, 4-1-1 Ogawa-Higashi, Kodaira, Tokyo 187-8553, Japan

关键词: Consensus building;    Guidelines development;    Delphi process;    Disaster mental health;   

Others  :  801928
DOI  :  10.1186/1752-4458-6-7

 received in 2012-04-25, accepted in 2012-06-25,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The mental health community in Japan had started reviewing the country’s disaster mental health guidelines before the Great East Japan Earthquake, aiming to revise them based on evidence and experience accumulated in the last decade. Given the wealth of experience and knowledge acquired in the field by many Japanese mental health professionals, we decided to develop the guidelines through systematic consensus building and selected the Delphi method.

Methods

After a thorough literature review and focus group interviews, 96 items regarding disaster mental health were included in Delphi Round 1. Of 100 mental health professionals experienced in disaster response who were invited to participate, 97 agreed. The appropriateness of each statement was assessed by the participants using a Likert scale (1: extremely inappropriate, 9: very appropriate) and providing free comments in three rounds. Consensus by experts was defined as an average score of ≥7 for which ≥70% of participants assigned this score, and items reaching consensus were included in the final guidelines.

Results

Overall, of the 96 items (89 initially asked and 7 added items), 77 items were agreed on (46 items in Round 1, and 19 positive and 12 negative agreed on items in Round 2). In Round 2, three statements with which participants agreed most strongly were: 1) A protocol for emergency work structure and information flow should be prepared in normal times; 2) The mental health team should attend regular meetings on health and medicine to exchange information; and 3) Generally, it is recommended not to ask disaster survivors about psychological problems at the initial response but ask about their present worries and physical condition. Three statements with which the participants disagreed most strongly in this round were: 1) Individuals should be encouraged to provide detailed accounts of their experiences; 2) Individuals should be provided with education if they are interested in receiving it; and 3) Bad news should be withheld from distressed individuals for fear of causing more upset.

Conclusions

Most items which achieved agreement in Round 1 were statements described in previous guidelines or publications, or statements regarding the basic attitude of human service providers. The revised guidelines were thus developed based on the collective wisdom drawn from Japanese practitioners’ experience while also considering the similarities and differences from the international standards.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Suzuki et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Fukasawa M, Suzuki Y, Kim Y: Needs assessment of local governments for the disaster mental health services. Jpn Bull Soc Psychit 2010, 19:16-26. Japanese
• [2]Kim Y: Guidelines for Local Mental Health Care Activities after a Disaster. http://www.ncnp.go.jp/nimh/seijin/EnglishDisasterMentalHealth.pdf webcite
• [3]The European Network for Traumatic Stress: The TENTS Guideline for Psychosocial Care Following Disasters and Major Incidents. http://www.tentsproject.eu/_site1264/dbfiles/document/_ ~ 57 ~ __7E64_7ETENTS_Full_guidelines_booklet_A5_FINAL_24-04.pdf webcite
• [4]Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC): IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings. http://www.who.int/hac/network/interagency/news/iasc_guidelines_mental_health_psychososial.pdf webcite
• [5]National Child Traumatic Stress Network and National Center for PTSD: Psychological First Aid: Field Operations Guide. 2nd edition. http://www.nctsn.org/sites/default/files/pfa/english/1-psyfirstaid_final_complete_manual.pdf webcite
• [6]Kelly CM, Jorm AF, Kitchener BA: Development of mental health first aid guideline on how a member of the public can support a person affected by a traumatic event: a Delphi study. BMC Psychiatry 2010, 10:49-63. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Bisson JI, Tavakoly B, Witteveen AB, Ajdukovi D, Jehel L, Johansen VJ, Nordanger D, Garcia FO, Punamaki RL, Schnyder U, Sezgin AU, Wittmann L, Olff M: TENTS guidelines: development of post-disaster psychosocial care guidelines through a Delphi process. Br J Psychiatry 2010, 196:69-74.
• [8]Suzuki Y: Role identification and coordination of care in disaster mental health. Journal of National Institute of Public Health 2008, 57:234-239. Japanese
• [9]Suzuki Y, Fukasawa M, Kim Y: Preparedness for disaster mental health among public health nurses in Japan. Japanese Journal of Traumatic Stress 2010, 8:45-53. Japanese
• [10]Linestone HA, Turoff M: The Delphi method: Techniques and Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA; 1975.