Contributors: Centre de recherche en épidémiologie et santé des populations (CESP); Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) (AP-HP)-Hôpital Paul Brousse-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Université Paris-Saclay; Santé publique France - French National Public Health Agency Saint-Maurice, France; Service de psychopathologie de l'enfant et de l'adolescent, psychiatrie générale Avicenne; Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) (AP-HP)-Hôpital Avicenne AP-HP; Assistance publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) (AP-HP)-Université Sorbonne Paris Nord; Centre National de Ressources et de Résilience Lille (CN2R); Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire CHU Lille (CHRU Lille); Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique (iPLESP); Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Sorbonne Université (SU); Bordeaux population health (BPH); Université de Bordeaux (UB)-Institut de Santé Publique, d'Épidémiologie et de Développement (ISPED)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM); Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies Oslo, Norway (NKVTS); Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de la Santé PIA ANR-10-EQPX-0021-01 Norges Forskningsråd: 288321; This study was performed by Santé publique France as part of its remit. Santé publique France is funded by the French Ministry of Health. The ESPA 13 November survey is part of EQUIPEX Matrice’s “13 November” transdisciplinary research programme which is funded by the French General Secretariat for investment (SGPI) via the National Research Agency (ANR) and its “Programme d’Investissement pour l’Avenir” (PIA ANR-10-EQPX-0021-01). PP, YM, GR, MM and SV are employees of Santé publique France. AM and TB are employees of the “Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale”. The contributions from LES and CV were funded by The Research Council of Norway (p.nr. 288321). The funding bodies had no role in the design of the study, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or in the writing of the manuscript. Acknowledgments; ANR-16-EQPX-0003,Matrice - 13 novembre,Matrice - 13 novembre(2016)
نبذة مختصرة : International audience ; Background: The use of mental health supports by populations exposed to terrorist attacks is rarely studied despite their need for psychotrauma care. This article focuses on civilians exposed to the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris and describes the different combinations of mental health supports (MHSu) used in the following year according to type of exposure and type of mental health disorder (MHD). Methods: Santé publique France conducted a web-based survey of civilians 8–11 months after their exposure to the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris. All 454 respondents met criterion A of the DSM-5 definition of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). MHD (anxiety, depression, PTSD) were assessed using the PCL-5 checklist and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. MHSu provided were grouped under outreach psychological support, visits for psychological difficulties to a victims’ or victim support association, consultation with a general practitioner (GP), consultation with a psychiatrist or psychologist (specialist), and initiation of regular mental health treatment (RMHT). Chi-squared tests highlighted differences in MHSu use according to type of exposure (directly threatened, witnessed, indirectly exposed) and MHD. Phi coefficients and joint tabulations were employed to analyse combinations of MHSu use. Results: Two-thirds of respondents used MHSu in the months following the attacks. Visits to a specialist and RMHT were more frequent than visits to a GP (respectively, 39, 33, 17%). These were the three MHSu most frequently used among people with PTSD (46,46,23%), with depression (52,39,20%), or with both (56,58, 33%). Witnesses with PTSD were more likely not to have RMHT than those directly threatened (respectively, 65,35%). Outreach support (35%) and visiting an association (16%) were both associated with RMHT (Phi = 0.20 and 0.38, respectively). Very few (1%) respondents initiated RMHT directly. Those who indirectly initiated it (32%) had taken one or more intermediate ...
Processing Request
No Comments.