4.3 Article

Symptoms of psychological distress among African Americans seeking HIV-related mental health care

Journal

AIDS PATIENT CARE AND STDS
Volume 22, Issue 5, Pages 413-421

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/apc.2007.0177

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [T32 DA07313] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of symptoms of psychological distress experienced by African Americans upon self-enrollment in HIV-related mental health care and to compare the symptoms in this sample to the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) normative sample, the instrument used in this study to assess symptoms of psychological distress. Data were collected from 575 African Americans living with HIV who self-enrolled at an HIV-related mental health clinic located in a large city in the southeastern United States. Nearly 20% of the sample reported a t score >= 63 for both somatization and paranoid ideation, a level indicative of a need for further psychological evaluation. Compared to the normative sample, this sample had significantly lower levels (p < 0.05) of anxiety, depression, phobic anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity, and global severity index than the normative sample and had significantly higher levels of paranoid ideation and somatization than the normative sample. These results indicate that, overall, African Americans presented for mental health services with lower levels of symptoms of psychological distress than the normative sample. To that end, it is possible that African Americans living with HIV may underreport symptoms of psychological distress or may experience symptoms of psychological distress differently than other individuals. As a result, it is important that HIV-related service providers recognize these patterns of psychological distress and provide appropriate referrals to HIV-related mental health providers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available