Mental health workers' perspectives on the implementation of a peer support intervention in five countries: qualitative findings from the UPSIDES study.

OBJECTIVE: The introduction of peer support in mental health teams creates opportunities and challenges for both peer and non-peer staff. However, the majority of research on mental health workers' (MHWs) experiences with peer support comes from high-income countries. Using Peer Support In Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) is an international multicentre study, which aims at scaling up peer support for people with severe mental illness in Europe, Asia and Africa. This study investigates MHWs experiences with UPSIDES peer support. DESIGN: Six focus groups with MHWs were conducted approximately 18 months after the implementation of the UPSIDES peer support intervention. Transcripts were analysed with a descriptive approach using thematic content analysis. SETTING: Qualitative data were collected in Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel) and Pune (India). PARTICIPANTS: 25 MHWs (19 females and 6 males) from UPSIDES study sites in the UPSIDES Trial (ISRCTN26008944) participated. FINDINGS: Five overarching themes were identified in MHWs' discussions: MHWs valued peer support workers (PSWs) for sharing their lived experiences with service users (theme 1), gained trust in peer support over time (theme 2) and provided support to them (theme 3). Participants from lower-resource study sites reported additional benefits, including reduced workload. PSWs extending their roles beyond what MHWs perceived as appropriate was described as a challenge (theme 4). Perceptions about PSWs varied based on previous peer support experience, ranging from considering PSWs as equal team members to viewing them as service users (theme 5). CONCLUSIONS: Considering local context is essential in order to understand MHWs' views on the cooperation with PSWs. Especially in settings with less prior experience of peer support, implementers should make extra effort to promote interaction between MHWs and PSWs. In order to better understand the determinants of successful implementation of peer support in diverse settings, further research should investigate the impact of contextual factors (eg, resource availability and cultural values). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.

Implementation of peer support for people with severe mental health conditions in high-, middle- and low-income-countries: a theory of change approach.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder engagement is essential to the design, implementation and evaluation of complex mental health interventions like peer support. Theory of Change (ToC) is commonly used in global health research to help structure and promote stakeholder engagement throughout the project cycle. Stakeholder insights are especially important in the context of a multi-site trial, in which an intervention may need to be adapted for implementation across very different settings while maintaining fidelity to a core model. This paper describes the development of a ToC for a peer support intervention to be delivered to people with severe mental health conditions in five countries as part of the UPSIDES trial. METHODS: One hundred thirty-four stakeholders from diverse backgrounds participated in a total of 17 workshops carried out at six UPSIDES implementing sites across high-, middle- and low-income settings (one site each in India, Israel, Uganda and Tanzania; two sites in Germany). The initial ToC maps created by stakeholders at each site were integrated into a cross-site ToC map, which was then revised to incorporate additional insights from the academic literature and updated iteratively through multiple rounds of feedback provided by the implementers. RESULTS: The final ToC map divides the implementation of the UPSIDES peer support intervention into three main stages: preparation, implementation, and sustainability. The map also identifies three levels of actors involved in peer support: individuals (service users and peer support workers), organisations (and their staff members), and the public. In the UPSIDES trial, the ToC map proved especially helpful in characterising and distinguishing between (a) common features of peer support, (b) shared approaches to implementation and (c) informing adaptations to peer support or implementation to account for contextual differences. CONCLUSIONS: UPSIDES is the first project to develop a multi-national ToC for a mental health peer support intervention. Stakeholder engagement in the ToC process helped to improve the cultural and contextual appropriateness of a complex intervention and ensure equivalence across sites for the purposes of a multi-site trial. It may serve as a blueprint for implementing similar interventions with a focus on recovery and social inclusion among people with mental ill-health across diverse settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN26008944 (Registration Date: 30/10/2019).

Development of the UPSIDES global mental health training programme for peer support workers: Perspectives from stakeholders in low, middle and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Peer support in mental health is a low-threshold intervention with increasing evidence for enhancing personal recovery and empowerment of persons living with severe mental health conditions. As peer support spreads globally, there is a growing need for peer support training programmes that work well in different contexts and cultures. This study evaluates the applicability and transferability of implementing a manualised multi-national training programme for mental health peer support workers called UPSIDES from the perspective of different local stakeholders in high-, middle-, and low-income countries. METHOD: Data from seven focus groups across six study sites in Africa (Tanzania, Uganda), Asia (India, Israel), and Europe (Germany 2 sites) with 44 participants (3 service users, 7 peer support workers, 25 mental health staff members, 6 clinical directors and 3 local community stakeholders) were thematically analysed. RESULTS: 397 codes were identified, which were thematically analysed. Five implementation enablers were identified: (i) Enhancing applicability through better guidance and clarity of training programme management, (ii) provision of sufficient time for training, (iii) addressing negative attitudes towards peer support workers by additional training of organisations and staff, (iv) inclusion of core components in the training manual such as communication skills, and (v) addressing cultural differences of society, mental health services and discrimination of mental health conditions. DISCUSSION: Participants in all focus groups discussed the implementation of the training and peer support intervention to a greater extent than the content of the training. This is in line with growing literature of difficulties in the implementation of peer support including difficulties in hiring peer support workers, lack of funding, and lack of role clarity. The results of this qualitative study with stakeholders from different mental health settings worldwide emphasises the need to further investigate the successful implementation of peer support training. All results have been incorporated into the manualisation of the UPSIDES peer support training.

Perspectives of key informants before and after implementing UPSIDES peer support in mental health services: qualitative findings from an international multi-site study.

BACKGROUND: Peer support is an essential part of recovery-oriented care worldwide. Contextual factors have an impact on the implementation of peer support work. However, research has paid little attention to similarities and differences of implementation factors in settings varying by income-level and cultural values. The aim of this study is to assess the factors influencing the implementation of a peer support intervention across study sites in low-, middle- and high-income countries in line with the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHOD: 6 focus groups with a total of 54 key informants with relevant contextual (organisational) knowledge regarding implementation facilitators and barriers were conducted at six study sites Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel), and Pune (India) before and 1.5 years after the start of UPSIDES peer support. Transcripts were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Across study sites key informants reported benefits of peer support for service users and peer support workers as implementation facilitators. At study sites with lower resources, reduced workload for mental health workers and improved access to mental health services through peer support were perceived as implementation facilitators (CFIR Domain 1: Intervention characteristics). The degree of engagement of mental health workers (CFIR Domain 3: Inner Setting/Domain 4: Individuals involved) varied across study sites and was seen either as a barrier (low engagement) or a facilitator (high engagement). Across study sites, adequate training of peer support workers (CFIR Domain 5: Implementation process) was seen as animplementation facilitator, while COVID-19 as well as low resource availability were reported as implementation barriers (CFIR Domain 2: Outer setting). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of considering contextual factors when implementing peer support, including previous experience and perceived benefits. Particular attention should be given to organisational benefits such as workload reduction and the allocation of sufficient resources as key drivers in LMICs. In HICs, the potential of organisational benefits for successful implementation should be further investigated and promoted.

Societal and organisational influences on implementation of mental health peer support work in low-income and high-income settings: a qualitative focus group study.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the established evidence base for mental health peer support work, widespread implementation remains a challenge. This study aimed to explore societal and organisational influences on the implementation of peer support work in low-income and high-income settings. DESIGN: Study sites conducted two focus groups in local languages at each site, using a topic guide based on a conceptual framework describing eight peer support worker (PSW) principles and five implementation issues. Transcripts were translated into English and an inductive thematic analysis was conducted to characterise implementation influences. SETTING: The study took place in two tertiary and three secondary mental healthcare sites as part of the Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) study, comprising three high-income sites (Hamburg and Ulm, Germany; Be'er Sheva, Israel) and two low-income sites (Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; Kampala, Uganda) chosen for diversity both in region and in experience of peer support work. PARTICIPANTS: 12 focus groups were conducted (including a total of 86 participants), across sites in Ulm (n=2), Hamburg (n=2), Dar es Salaam (n=2), Be'er Sheva (n=2) and Kampala (n=4). Three individual interviews were also done in Kampala. All participants met the inclusion criteria: aged over 18 years; actual or potential PSW or mental health clinician or hospital/community manager or regional/national policy-maker; and able to give informed consent. RESULTS: Six themes relating to implementation influences were identified: community and staff attitudes, resource availability, organisational culture, role definition, training and support and peer support network. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multicountry study to explore societal attitudes and organisational culture influences on the implementation of peer support. Addressing community-level discrimination and developing a recovery orientation in mental health systems can contribute to effective implementation of peer support work. The relationship between societal stigma about mental health and resource allocation decisions warrants future investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.

Determining the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Availability, Use, and Readiness of Family Planning and Contraceptive Services at Selected Primary Health Care Facilities in Africa and Asia: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and the associated social restrictions may have disrupted the provision of essential services, including family planning (FP) and contraceptive services. This protocol is adapted from a generic study protocol titled "Health systems analysis and evaluations of the barriers to availability and readiness of sexual and reproductive health services in COVID-19 affected areas," conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) Department of Reproductive Health and Research. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the availability and use of FP and contraceptive services in primary health facilities during and after the COVID-19 pandemic; assess the risk perceptions of COVID-19 stigma, barriers to access, and quality of services from clients' and providers' perspectives in the COVID-19-affected areas; and assess the postpandemic recovery of the facilities in the provision of FP and contraceptive services. METHODS: In-depth interviews will be conducted with clients-women in the reproductive age group and their male partners who visit the selected health facilities for FP and contraceptive services-and health providers (the most knowledgeable person on FP and contraceptive service provision) at the selected health facilities. Focus group discussions will be conducted with clients at the selected health facilities and in the community. The in-depth interviews and focus group discussions will help to understand clients' and health service providers' perspectives of FP and contraceptive service availability and readiness in COVID-19-affected areas. A cross-sectional health facility assessment will be conducted in all the selected health facilities to determine the health facility infrastructure's ability and readiness to provide FP and contraceptive services and to capture the trends in FP and contraceptive services available during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scientific approval for this study is obtained from the WHO Research Project Review Panel, and the WHO Ethics Review Committee has given ethical approval in the 3 countries. RESULTS: Using a standardized research protocol will ensure that the results from this study can be compared across regions and countries. The study was funded in March 2021. It received ethics approval from the WHO Ethics Review Committee in February 2022. We completed data collection in September 2022. We plan to complete the data analysis by March 2023. We plan to publish the study results by Summer 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study will provide a better understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on FP and contraceptive services at the facility level, which will help policy makers and health managers develop and strengthen FP policies and services in health facilities to be more responsive to community needs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/43329.

Proportionate translation of study materials and measures in a multinational global health trial: methodology development and implementation.

OBJECTIVES: Current translation guidelines do not include sufficiently flexible translation approaches for different study materials. We aimed to develop a proportionate methodology to inform translation of all types of study materials in global health trials. DESIGN: The design included three stages: (1) categorisation of study materials, (2) integration of existing translation frameworks and (3) methodology implementation (Germany, India, Israel, Tanzania and Uganda) and refinement. PARTICIPANTS: The study population comprised 27 mental health service users and 27 mental health workers who were fluent in the local language in stage 7 (pretesting), and 54 bilingual mental health service users, aged 18 years or over, and able to give consent as judged by a clinician for step 9 (psychometric evaluation). SETTING: The study took place in preparation for the Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN26008944). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measure was the Social Inclusion Scale (SIS). RESULTS: The typology identifies four categories of study materials: local text, study-generated text, secondary measures and primary measure. The UPSIDES Proportionate Translation Methodology comprises ten steps: preparation, forward translation, reconciliation, back translation, review, harmonisation, pretesting, finalisation, psychometric evaluation and dissemination. The translated primary outcome measure for the UPSIDES Trial (SIS) demonstrated adequate content validity (49.3 vs 48.5, p=0.08), convergent validity and internal consistency (0.73), with minimal floor/ceiling effects. CONCLUSION: This methodology can be recommended for translating, cross-culturally adapting and validating all study materials, including standardised measures, in future multisite global trials. The methodology is particularly applicable to multi-national studies involving sites with differing resource levels. The robustness of the psychometric findings is limited by the sample sizes for each site. However, making this limitation explicit is preferable to the typical practice of not reporting adequate details about measure translation and validation. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.

Supply-side factors influencing informal payment for healthcare services in Tanzania.

Informal payments for healthcare are widespread in sub-Saharan Africa. They are often regressive, potentially limiting access to quality healthcare, particularly for the most vulnerable, and can have catastrophic consequences for households. Yet there is little empirical research that uses theory-driven hypotheses to explore what influences informal payments and, especially, from health workers' perspectives. Consequently, we have explored the characteristics of health workers and facilities influencing informal payments in Tanzania, examining two hypotheses: health workers with power and position in the system are more likely to receive informal payments, and transparency and accountability measures can be bypassed by those who can game the system. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 432 health workers from 42 public health facilities (hospitals and health centres) in 12 district councils from Pwani and Dar es Salam regions in Tanzania. Our dependent variable was whether the health worker has ever asked for or been given informal payments or bribes, while explanatory variables were measured at the individual and facility level. Given the hierarchical structure of the data, we used a multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression to explore the determinants. Twenty-seven percent of 432 health workers ever engaged in informal payment. This was more common amongst younger (<35 years) health workers and those higher in the hierarchy (specialists and heads of departments). Those receiving entitlements and benefits in a timely manner and who were subject to continued supervision were significantly less likely to receive informal payments. The likelihood of engaging in informal payments varied among health workers, consistent with our first hypothesis, but evidence on the second hypothesis remains mixed. Thus, policy responses should address both individual and system-level factors, including ensuring adequate and progressive health sector financing, better and timely remuneration of frontline public health providers, and enhanced governance and supervision.

Challenges to peer support in low- and middle-income countries during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: A recent editorial urged those working in global mental health to "change the conversation" on coronavirus disease (Covid-19) by putting more focus on the needs of people with severe mental health conditions. UPSIDES (Using Peer Support In Developing Empowering mental health Services) is a six-country consortium carrying out implementation research on peer support for people with severe mental health conditions in high- (Germany, Israel), lower middle- (India) and low-income (Tanzania, Uganda) settings. This commentary briefly outlines some of the key challenges faced by UPSIDES sites in low- and middle-income countries as a result of Covid-19, sharing early lessons that may also apply to other services seeking to address the needs of people with severe mental health conditions in similar contexts. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED: The key take-away from experiences in India, Tanzania and Uganda is that inequalities in terms of access to mobile technologies, as well as to secure employment and benefits, put peer support workers in particularly vulnerable situations precisely when they and their peers are also at their most isolated. Establishing more resilient peer support services requires attention to the already precarious situation of people with severe mental health conditions in low-resource settings, even before a crisis like Covid-19 occurs. While it is essential to maintain contact with peer support workers and peers to whatever extent is possible remotely, alternatives to face-to-face delivery of psychosocial interventions are not always straightforward to implement and can make it more difficult to observe individuals' reactions, talk about emotional issues and offer appropriate support. CONCLUSIONS: In environments where mental health care was already heavily medicalized and mostly limited to medications issued by psychiatric institutions, Covid-19 threatens burgeoning efforts to pursue a more holistic and person-centered model of care for people with severe mental health conditions. As countries emerge from lockdown, those working in global mental health will need to redouble their efforts not only to make up for lost time and help individuals cope with the added stressors of Covid-19 in their communities, but also to regain lost ground in mental health care reform and in broader conversations about mental health in low-resource settings.

Peer support for people with severe mental illness versus usual care in high-, middle- and low-income countries: study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (UPSIDES-RCT).

BACKGROUND: Peer support is an established intervention involving a person recovering from mental illness supporting others with mental illness. Peer support is an under-used resource in global mental health. Building upon comprehensive formative research, this study will rigorously evaluate the impact of peer support at multiple levels, including service user outcomes (psychosocial and clinical), peer support worker outcomes (work role and empowerment), service outcomes (cost-effectiveness and return on investment), and implementation outcomes (adoption, sustainability and organisational change). METHODS: UPSIDES-RCT is a pragmatic, parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of using peer support in developing empowering mental health services (UPSIDES) at four measurement points over 1 year (baseline, 4-, 8- and 12-month follow-up), with embedded process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Research will take place in a range of high-, middle- and low-income countries (Germany, UK, Israel, India, Uganda and Tanzania). The primary outcome is social inclusion of service users with severe mental illness (N = 558; N = 93 per site) at 8-month follow-up, measured with the Social Inclusion Scale. Secondary outcomes include empowerment (using the Empowerment Scale), hope (using the HOPE scale), recovery (using Stages of Recovery) and health and social functioning (using the Health of the Nations Outcome Scales). Mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate mediators and moderators of effect and the implementation experiences of four UPSIDES stakeholder groups (service users, peer support workers, mental health workers and policy makers). A cost-effectiveness analysis examining cost-utility and health budget impact will estimate the value for money of UPSIDES peer support. DISCUSSION: The UPSIDES-RCT will explore the essential components necessary to create a peer support model in mental health care, while providing the evidence required to sustain and eventually scale-up the intervention in different cultural, organisational and resource settings. By actively involving and empowering service users, UPSIDES will move mental health systems toward a recovery orientation, emphasising user-centredness, community participation and the realisation of mental health as a human right. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN26008944. Registered on 30 October 2019.

Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES): Background, Rationale and Methodology.

BACKGROUND: Peers are people with lived experience of mental illness. Peer support is an established intervention in which peers offer support to others with mental illness. A large proportion of people living with severe mental illness receive no care. The care gap is largest in low- and middle-income countries, with detrimental effects on individuals and societies. The global shortage of human resources for mental health is an important driver of the care gap. Peers are an under-used resource in global mental health. OBJECTIVES: To describe rationale and methodology of an international multicentre study which will scale-up peer support for people with severe mental illness in high-, middle-, and low-income countries through mixed-methods implementation research. METHODS: UPSIDES is an international community of research and practice for peer support, including peer support workers, mental health researchers, and other relevant stakeholders in eight study sites across six countries in Europe, Africa, and Asia. During the first two years of UPSIDES, a series of qualitative studies and systematic reviews will explore stakeholders' perceptions and the current state of peer support at each site. Findings will be incorporated into a conceptual framework to guide the development of a culturally appropriate peer support intervention to be piloted across all study sites. All intervention and study materials will be translated according to internationally recognised guidelines.Expected Impact: UPSIDES: will leverage the unique expertise of people with lived experience of mental illness to strengthen mental health systems in high-, middle- and low-income countries. UPSIDES will actively involve and empower service users and embed patient-centeredness, recovery orientation, human rights approaches, and community participation into services. The focus on capacity-building of peers may prove particularly valuable in low-resource settings in which shortages of human capital are most severe.