RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Globally, 235 million people are impacted by humanitarian emergencies worldwide, presenting increased risk of experiencing a mental disorder. Our objective was to test the effectiveness of a brief group psychological treatment delivered by trained facilitators without prior professional mental health training in a disaster-prone setting. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) from November 25, 2018 through September 30, 2019. Participants in both arms were assessed at baseline, midline (7 weeks post-baseline, which was approximately 1 week after treatment in the experimental arm), and endline (20 weeks post-baseline, which was approximately 3 months posttreatment). The intervention was Group Problem Management Plus (PM+), a psychological treatment of 5 weekly sessions, which was compared with enhanced usual care (EUC) consisting of a family psychoeducation meeting with a referral option to primary care providers trained in mental healthcare. The setting was 72 wards (geographic unit of clustering) in eastern Nepal, with 1 PM+ group per ward in the treatment arm. Wards were eligible if they were in disaster-prone regions and residents spoke Nepali. Wards were assigned to study arms based on covariate constrained randomization. Eligible participants were adult women and men 18 years of age and older who met screening criteria for psychological distress and functional impairment. Outcomes were measured at the participant level, with assessors blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was psychological distress assessed with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Secondary outcomes included depression symptoms, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, "heart-mind" problems, social support, somatic symptoms, and functional impairment. The hypothesized mediator was skill use aligned with the treatment's mechanisms of action. A total of 324 participants were enrolled in the control arm (36 wards) and 319 in the Group PM+ arm (36 wards). The overall sample (N = 611) had a median age of 45 years (range 18-91 years), 82% of participants were female, 50% had recently experienced a natural disaster, and 31% had a chronic physical illness. Endline assessments were completed by 302 participants in the control arm (36 wards) and 303 participants in the Group PM+ arm (36 wards). At the midline assessment (immediately after Group PM+ in the experimental arm), mean GHQ-12 total score was 2.7 units lower in Group PM+ compared to control (95% CI: 1.7, 3.7, p < 0.001), with standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.4 (95% CI: -0.5, -0.2). At 3 months posttreatment (primary endpoint), mean GHQ-12 total score was 1.4 units lower in Group PM+ compared to control (95% CI: 0.3, 2.5, p = 0.014), with SMD of -0.2 (95% CI: -0.4, 0.0). Among the secondary outcomes, Group PM+ was associated with endline with a larger proportion attaining more than 50% reduction in depression symptoms (29.9% of Group PM+ arm versus 17.3% of control arm, risk ratio = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.4, p = 0.002). Fewer participants in the Group PM+ arm continued to have "heart-mind" problems at endline (58.8%) compared to the control arm (69.4%), risk ratio = 0.8 (95% CI, 0.7, 1.0, p = 0.042). Group PM+ was not associated with lower PTSD symptoms or functional impairment. Use of psychosocial skills at midline was estimated to explain 31% of the PM+ effect on endline GHQ-12 scores. Adverse events in the control arm included 1 suicide death and 1 reportable incidence of domestic violence; in the Group PM+ arm, there was 1 death due to physical illness. Study limitations include lack of power to evaluate gender-specific effects, lack of long-term outcomes (e.g., 12 months posttreatment), and lack of cost-effectiveness information. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that a 5-session group psychological treatment delivered by nonspecialists modestly reduced psychological distress and depression symptoms in a setting prone to humanitarian emergencies. Benefits were partly explained by the degree of psychosocial skill use in daily life. To improve the treatment benefit, future implementation should focus on approaches to enhance skill use by PM+ participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03747055.
Asunto(s)
Depresión/terapia , Salud Mental , Desastres Naturales , Solución de Problemas , Psicoterapia Breve , Psicoterapia de Grupo , Sistemas de Socorro , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/terapia , Estrés Psicológico/terapia , Adaptación Psicológica , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Depresión/diagnóstico , Depresión/etiología , Depresión/psicología , Femenino , Estado Funcional , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nepal , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/diagnóstico , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/etiología , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/psicología , Estrés Psicológico/diagnóstico , Estrés Psicológico/etiología , Estrés Psicológico/psicología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Colombia hosts the largest number of refugees and migrants fleeing the humanitarian emergency in Venezuela, many of whom experience high levels of displacement-related trauma and adversity. Yet, Colombian mental health services do not meet the needs of this population. Scalable, task-sharing interventions, such as Group Problem Management Plus (Group PM+), have the potential to bridge this gap by utilizing lay workers to provide the intervention. However, the current literature lacks a comprehensive understanding of how and for whom Group PM+ is most effective. This mixed methods study utilized data from a randomized effectiveness-implementation trial to examine the mediators and moderators of Group PM+ on mental health outcomes. One hundred twenty-eight migrant and refugee women in northern Colombia participated in Group PM+ delivered by trained community members. Patterns in moderation effects showed that participants in more stable, less marginalized positions improved the most. Results from linear regression models showed that Group PM+-related skill acquisition was not a significant mediator of the association between session attendance and mental health outcomes. Participants and facilitators reported additional possible mediators and community-level moderators that warrant future research. Further studies are needed to examine mediators and moderators contributing to the effectiveness of task-shared, scalable, psychological interventions in diverse contexts.
Asunto(s)
Salud Mental , Refugiados , Migrantes , Humanos , Colombia , Refugiados/psicología , Femenino , Venezuela , Adulto , Migrantes/psicología , Migrantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
A significant number of young people throughout the world are experiencing mental health concerns. Many young people will develop their first mental health concerns or will be managing their symptoms while enrolled in institutions of higher education. Although many colleges and universities are aware of the significant mental health needs among their students, the mental health and psychosocial needs of students often exceed the availability of resources and cultural and contextual barriers, such as stigma, may further impede access to care. Such gaps and barriers in mental health may lead to poor prognosis as well as negative educational and social outcomes. We propose that non-specialist delivered mental health and psychosocial interventions may play a critical role in reducing the gaps in care for students in higher education. In particular, non-specialist delivered care can complement existing specialized services to provide stepped models of care. Importantly, the adaptation and implementation of non-specialist delivered mental health and psychosocial support interventions in higher education may lead to innovative strategies for increasing access to care in this context, but may lead to adaptations that could apply to contexts outside of higher education as well.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has propelled a global paradigm shift in how psychological support is delivered. Remote delivery, through phone and video calls, is now commonplace around the world. However, most adoption of remote delivery methods is occurring without any formal training to ensure safe and effective care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this applied qualitative study was to determine practitioners' experiences of rapidly adapting to deliver psychological support remotely during COVID-19. DESIGN: We used a pragmatic paradigm and applied approach to gain perspectives related to the feasibility and perceived usefulness of synchronous remote psychological support, including views on how practitioners can be prepared. METHODS: Key informant interviews were conducted remotely with 27 specialist and non-specialist practitioners in Nepal, Perú and the USA. Interviewees were identified through purposeful sampling. Data were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Respondents revealed three key themes: (i) Remote delivery of psychological support raises unique safety concerns and interference with care, (ii) Remote delivery enhances skills and expands opportunities for delivery of psychological support to new populations, and (iii) New training approaches are needed to prepare specialist and non-specialist practitioners to deliver psychological support remotely. CONCLUSIONS: Remote psychological support is feasible and useful for practitioners, including non-specialists, in diverse global settings. Simulated remote role plays may be a scalable method for ensuring competency in safe and effective remotely-delivered care.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Pandemias , Nepal , Perú , ConsejoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Although women's health is prioritised in global research, few studies have identified structural barriers and strategies to promote female leadership and gender equality in the global health research workforce, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study to evaluate gender equality in the mental health research workforce in Nepal. The scoping review assessed gender disparities in authorship of journal publications for Nepal mental health research, using databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, NepJol, NepMed) for 5 years. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 22 Nepali researchers to identify structural barriers limiting women's leadership. RESULTS: Of 337 articles identified, 61% were by Nepali first authors. Among Nepali first authors, 38.3% were women. Nepali women had half the odds of being first authors compared with men, when referenced against non-Nepali authors (OR 0.50, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.16). When limiting publications to those based on funded research, the odds were worse for first authorship among Nepali women (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.71). The qualitative analysis supported the scoping review and identified a lack of gender-friendly organisational policies, difficulties in communication and mobility, and limited opportunities for networking as barriers to women's leadership in global health research. CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed for greater representation of Nepali women in global mental health research, which will require transformative organisational policies to foster female leadership. Those in leadership need to recognise gender inequalities and take necessary steps to address them. Funding agencies should prioritise supporting organisations with gender equality task forces, policies and indicators.
Asunto(s)
Autoria , Salud Mental , Femenino , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Nepal , Recursos HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Because of the high burden of untreated mental illness in humanitarian settings and low- and middle-income countries, scaling-up effective psychological interventions require a cultural adaptation process that is feasible and acceptable. Our adaptation process incorporates changes into both content and implementation strategies, with a focus on local understandings of distress and treatment mechanisms of action. METHODS: Building upon the ecological validity model, we developed a 10-step process, the mental health Cultural Adaptation and Contextualization for Implementation (mhCACI) procedure, and piloted this approach in Nepal for Group Problem Management Plus (PM+), a task-sharing intervention, proven effective for adults with psychological distress in low-resource settings. Detailed documentation tools were used to ensure rigor and transparency during the adaptation process. FINDINGS: The mhCACI is a 10-step process: (1) identify mechanisms of action, (2) conduct a literature desk review for the culture and context, (3) conduct a training-of-trainers, (4) translate intervention materials, (5) conduct an expert read-through of the materials, (6) qualitative assessment of intervention population and site, (7) conduct practice rounds, (8) conduct an adaptation workshop with experts and implementers, (9) pilot test the training, supervision, and implementation, and (10) review through process evaluation. For Group PM+, key adaptations were harmonizing the mechanisms of action with cultural models of 'tension'; modification of recruitment procedures to assure fit; and development of a skills checklist. CONCLUSION: A 10-step mhCACI process could feasibly be implemented in a humanitarian setting to rapidly prepare a psychological intervention for widespread implementation.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Globally, the lack of availability of psychological services for people exposed to adversities has led to the development of a range of scalable psychological interventions with features that enable better scale-up. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a brief intervention of five sessions that can be delivered by non-specialists. It is designed for people in communities in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) affected by any kind of adversity. Two recent randomized controlled trials in Pakistan and Kenya demonstrated the effectiveness of individually delivered PM+. A group version of PM+ has been developed to make the intervention more scalable and acceptable. This paper describes the protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial (c-RCT) on locally adapted Group PM+ in Nepal. METHODS/DESIGN: This c-RCT will compare Group PM+ to enhanced usual care (EUC) in participants with high levels of psychological distress recruited from the community. The study is designed as a two-arm, single-blind c-RCT that will be conducted in a community-based setting in Morang, a flood affected district in Eastern Nepal. Randomization will occur at ward level, the smallest administrative level in Nepal, with 72 enrolled wards allocated to Group PM+ or to EUC (ratio 1:1). Group PM+ consists of five approximately 2.5-h sessions, in which participants are taught techniques to manage their stressors and problems, and is delivered by trained and supervised community psychosocial workers (CPSWs). EUC consists of a family meeting with (a) basic information on adversity and mental health, (b) benefits of getting support, (c) information on seeking services from local health facilities with mhGAP-trained staff. The primary outcome measure is levels of individual psychological distress at endline (equivalent to 20 ± 1 weeks after baseline), measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Secondary outcome measures include levels of functioning, depressive symptoms, post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, levels of social support, somatic symptoms, and ways of coping. We hypothesize that skills acquired will mediate any impact of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This c-RCT will contribute to the growing evidence-base for transdiagnostic psychological interventions delivered by non-specialists for people in communities affected by adversity. If Group PM+ is proven effective, the intervention manual will be released for use, giving the opportunity for further adaptation and implementation of the intervention in diverse settings with communities that require better access to psychological interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03747055.
Asunto(s)
Altruismo , Intervención en la Crisis (Psiquiatría)/métodos , Depresión/terapia , Inundaciones , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/terapia , Estrés Psicológico/terapia , Adaptación Psicológica , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Análisis por Conglomerados , Depresión/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Salud Mental , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nepal/epidemiología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Método Simple Ciego , Apoyo Social , Trastornos por Estrés Postraumático/epidemiología , Estrés Psicológico/epidemiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of common mental disorders increases in humanitarian emergencies while access to services to address them decreases. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a brief five-session trans-diagnostic psychological WHO intervention employing empirically supported strategies that can be delivered by non-specialist lay-providers under specialist supervision to adults impaired by distress. Two recent randomized controlled trials in Pakistan and Kenya demonstrated the efficacy of individually delivered PM+. To make PM+ more scalable and acceptable in different contexts, it is important to develop a group version as well, with 6-8 participants in session. A study is needed to demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of both the intervention in a new cultural context and the procedures to evaluate Group PM+ in a cluster randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This protocol describes a feasibility trial to Group PM+ in Sindhuli, Nepal. This study will evaluate procedures for a cluster randomized controlled trial (c-RCT) with Village Development Committees (VDCs), which are the second smallest unit of government administration, as the unit of randomization. Adults with high levels of psychological distress and functional impairment will receive either Group PM+ (n = 60) or enhanced usual care (EUC; n = 60). Psychological distress, functional impairment, depression symptoms, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and perceived problems will be measured during screening, pre-treatment baseline, and 7-10 days after the intervention. Qualitative data will be collected from beneficiaries, their families, local stakeholders, and staff to support quantitative data and to identify themes reporting that those involved and/or effected by Group PM+ perceived it as being acceptable, feasible, and useful. The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention; to identify issues around implementation of local adaptation methods, training, supervision, and outcomes measures; and to assure that procedures are adequate for a subsequent effectiveness c-RCT. DISCUSSION: Outcomes from this trial will contribute to optimizing feasibility and acceptability through cultural adaptation and contextualization of the intervention as well as refining the design for a c-RCT, which will evaluate the effectiveness of Group PM+ in Nepal. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03359486.
RESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE, DESIGN, AND SETTING: Adolescents face barriers to accessing youth-friendly family planning services, specifically long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). School-based health centers (SBHCs) can provide youth-friendly care. A quality improvement project was undertaken to assess quality of care before, during, and after LARC services at 3 SBHCs, and to identify specific strategies for improving these LARC services. PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTIONS, AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We interviewed 18 female adolescents who received LARC services. Two independent reviewers coded deidentified verbatim transcripts; discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third reviewer. A guide of themes was structured corresponding to Ambresin's domains of youth-friendly services. From these domains, we identified emerging themes using grounded theory, with a focus on practical suggestions for improving LARC services in SBHCs. RESULTS: Interviewees ranged in age from 15 to 19 (average: 17) years. Most had insertions (12 levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS); Mirena®), 1 copper intrauterine device (Paragard®), 5 contraceptive implant (Nexplanon®). Overall, participants were highly satisfied with SBHC LARC services. Within the domain of communication, 2 key themes emerged: balancing need for information with concerns about being overwhelmed by information; and interest in information that directly addresses misconceptions about LARCs. Suggested strategies included providing postprocedure "care packages" with information and supplies, and supporting a peer-based network of adolescent LARC users and previous patients to serve as a resource for new patients. CONCLUSION: This quality improvement project, conducted in a unique setting, gave adolescents a voice. The identified strategies for improving health education, social support, and outreach might be generalizable to other SBHCs. Future research could explore the effect of implementing these suggested strategies on reproductive health care use and outcomes at SBHCs.