Views and experiences of migrants and stakeholders involved in social and health care for migrants in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had major and potentially long-lasting effects on mental health and wellbeing across populations worldwide. However, these impacts were not felt equally, leading to an exacerbation of health inequalities, especially affecting vulnerable populations such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Aiming to inform the adaptation and implementation of psychological intervention programmes, the present study investigated priority mental health needs in this population group. METHODS: Participants were adult asylum seekers, refugees and migrants (ARMs) and stakeholders with experience in the field of migration living in Verona, Italy, and fluent in Italian and English. A two-stage process was carried out to examine their needs using qualitative methods including free listing interviews and focus group discussions, according to Module One of the DIME (Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation) manual. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analyses approach. RESULTS: A total of 19 participants (12 stakeholders, 7 ARMs) completed the free listing interviews and 20 participants (12 stakeholders and 8 ARMs) attended focus group discussions. Salient problems and functions that emerged during free listing interviews were discussed during the focus group discussions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, ARMs struggled with many everyday living difficulties in their resettlement country due to social and economic issues, revealing a strong influence of contextual factors in determining mental health. Both ARMs and stakeholders highlighted a mismatch between needs, expectations and interventions as factors that may hamper proper implementation of health and social programmes. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings could help in the adaptation and implementation of psychological interventions targeting the needs of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants aiming to find a match between needs, expectations, and the corresponding interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number 2021-UNVRCLE-0106707, February 11 2021.

Cost-effectiveness of the Self-Help Plus Intervention for Adult Syrian Refugees Hosted in Turkey.

Importance: The cost-effectiveness of the Self-Help Plus (SH+) program, a group-based, guided, self-help psychological intervention developed by the World Health Organization for people affected by adversity, is unclear. Objective: To investigate the cost-utility of providing the SH+ intervention combined with enhanced usual care vs enhanced usual care alone for Syrian refugees or asylum seekers hosted in Turkey. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation was performed as a prespecified part of an assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial conducted between October 1, 2018, and November 30, 2019, with 6-month follow-up. A total of 627 adults with psychological distress but no diagnosed psychiatric disorder were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the enhanced usual care group. Interventions: The SH+ program was a 5-session (2 hours each), group-based, stress management course in which participants learned self-help skills for managing stress by listening to audio sessions. The SH+ sessions were facilitated by briefly trained, nonspecialist individuals, and an illustrated book was provided to group members. Th intervention group received the SH+ intervention plus enhanced usual care; the control group received only enhanced usual care from the local health care system. Enhanced usual care included access to free health care services provided by primary and secondary institutions plus details on nongovernmental organizations and freely available mental health services, social services, and community networks for people under temporary protection of Turkey and refugees. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the Turkish health care system. An intention-to-treat analysis was used including all participants who were randomized and for whom baseline data on costs and QALYs were available. Data were analyzed September 30, 2020, to July 30, 2021. Results: Of 627 participants (mean [SD] age, 31.3 [9.0] years; 393 [62.9%] women), 313 were included in the analysis for the SH+ group and 314 in the analysis for the enhanced usual care group. An incremental cost-utility ratio estimate of T£6068 ($1147) per QALY gained was found when the SH+ intervention was provided to groups of 10 Syrian refugees. At a willingness to pay per QALY gained of T£14 831 ($2802), the SH+ intervention had a 97.5% chance of being cost-effective compared with enhanced usual care alone. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic evaluation suggests that implementation of the SH+ intervention compared with enhanced usual care alone for adult Syrian refugees or asylum seekers hosted in Turkey is cost-effective from the perspective of the Turkish health care system when both international and country-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds were applied.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Self-Help Plus (SH+) for preventing mental disorders in refugees and asylum seekers in Europe and Turkey: study protocols for two randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: This article describes two randomised controlled trials that will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Self-Help Plus (SH+), a group self-help intervention developed by the WHO to reduce distress. In these trials SH+ is being tested as a preventative intervention to lower the incidence of mental disorders in asylum seekers and refugees with psychological distress resettled in Europe and Turkey. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two prospective, multicentre, randomised, rater-blinded, parallel-group studies will follow participants over a period of 12 months. One trial will be conducted in Europe and one in Turkey. In each trial, 600 asylum seekers and refugees screening positive on the General Health Questionnaire (≥3), but without a formal diagnosis of any mental disorders according to the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, will be randomly allocated to SH+or to enhanced treatment-as-usual. The primary outcome will be a lower incidence of mental disorders at 6 month follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include the evaluation of psychological symptoms, functioning, well-being, treatment acceptability and indicators of intervention cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The two trials received ethical clearance from the local Ethics Committees of the participating sites (seven sites), as well as from the WHO Ethics Committee. All participants will provide informed consent before screening and before study inclusion (a two-step procedure). The results of the trials will be disseminated in agreement with a dissemination plan that includes publication(s) in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at relevant national and international conferences and meetings. TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03571347, NCT03587896.

Access to and Use of Psychiatric Services by Migrants Resettled in Northern Italy.

The present study was conducted to describe access to and use of psychiatric services by migrants resettled in a large and well-defined catchment area. The study was conducted in a catchment area of 459,536 inhabitants in Verona, a city located in the Northeast of Italy. Using a psychiatric case register, all native and migrant individuals with a first ever psychiatric contact from 2000 to 2015 were identified. Service use data during the 12 months following first contact were collected. During the study period a total of 2610 migrants and 28,860 natives had at least one psychiatric contact. A progressive rise in the proportion of migrants seeking psychiatric care was observed, from 2.5% in 2000 to more than 14% in 2015. During the 12 months following first contact, the proportion of patients with a single consultation did not differ between resettled migrants and natives. However, migrants were more often marked users or heavy users of psychiatric services. Multivariate linear regression analyses showed that younger male individuals with psychotic disorders experienced higher psychiatric services use regardless their native or migrant condition. In a large catchment area with a well-developed community-based system of mental health care a progressive rise in the number of migrants seeking psychiatric care was observed. The pattern of service use during the 12 months after first contact was not related to nationality, suggesting the capacity of community psychiatric services to retain people in care. These findings call for the development of culturally and linguistically appropriate community psychiatric services.

Duloxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.

BACKGROUND: Although pharmacological and psychological interventions are both effective for major depression, in primary and secondary care settings antidepressant drugs remain the mainstay of treatment. Amongst antidepressants many different agents are available. Duloxetine hydrochloride is a dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine and has been licensed by the Food and Drug Administration in the US for major depressive disorder (MDD), generalised anxiety disorder, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia and chronic musculoskeletal pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of duloxetine in comparison with all other antidepressant agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE (1966 to 2012), EMBASE (1974 to 2012), the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to March 2012. No language restriction was applied. Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were hand-searched. Pharmaceutical company marketing duloxetine and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to duloxetine versus any other antidepressive agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and a double-entry procedure was employed. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 16 randomised controlled trials (overall 5735 participants) were included in this systematic review. Of these, three trials were unpublished. We found 11 studies (overall 3304 participants) comparing duloxetine with one selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) (six studies versus paroxetine, three studies versus escitalopram and two versus fluoxetine), four studies (overall 1978 participants) comparing duloxetine with a newer antidepressants (three with venlafaxine and one with desvenlafaxine, respectively) and one study (overall 453 participants) comparing duloxetine with an antipsychotic drug which is also used as an antidepressive agent, quetiapine. No studies were found comparing duloxetine with tricyclic antidepressants. The pooled confidence intervals were rather wide and there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy when comparing duloxetine with other antidepressants. However, when compared with escitalopram or venlafaxine, there was a higher rate of drop out due to any cause in the patients randomised to duloxetine (odds ratio (OR) 1.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 2.62 and OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.15, respectively). There was also some weak evidence suggesting that patients taking duloxetine experienced more adverse events than paroxetine (OR 1.24; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.55). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine did not seem to provide a significant advantage in efficacy over other antidepressive agents for the acute-phase treatment of major depression. No differences in terms of efficacy were found, even though duloxetine was worse than some SSRIs (most of all, escitalopram) and newer antidepressants (like venlafaxine) in terms of acceptability and tolerability. Unfortunately, we only found evidence comparing duloxetine with a handful of other active antidepressive agents and only a few trials per comparison were found (in some cases we retrieved just one trial). This limited the power of the review to detect moderate, but clinically meaningful differences between the drugs. As many statistical tests have been used in the review, the findings from this review are better thought of as hypothesis forming rather than hypothesis testing and it would be very comforting to see the conclusions replicated in future trials. Most of included studies were sponsored by the drug industry manufacturing duloxetine. As for all other new investigational compounds, the potential for overestimation of treatment effect due to sponsorship bias should be borne in mind. In the present review no trials reported economic outcomes. Given that several SSRIs and the great majority of antidepressants are now available as generic formulation (only escitalopram, desvenlafaxine and duloxetine are still on patent), more comprehensive economic estimates of antidepressant treatment effect should be considered to better inform healthcare policy.

Comparison of patient and clinician perspectives in the assessment of antipsychotic medication adherence.

BACKGROUND: Factors influencing patient and clinician perspectives in the assessment of medication adherence have never been compared. METHOD: This study used baseline and 12-month follow-up data from the QUATRO study, an international multicentre study. At baseline, information on patient sociodemographic characteristics, treatment factors, psychopathology, functioning and experience of antipsychotic side effects was gathered. After 12 months of follow-up, psychopathology, functioning and patient experience of antipsychotic side effects were measured once more, and a patient and clinician rating of adherence was obtained by means of the Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS) and the Compliance Rating Scale (CRS). RESULTS: During the recruitment period, 409 subjects with a diagnosis of schizophrenia were recruited. Patients were more often men and single. Mean age was 41.5 years. At the time of the assessment, more than 40% were unemployed and on average had been on antipsychotic treatment for more than 10 years. Nearly 70% were receiving second-generation antipsychotics, and 50% received adherence therapy during the 12 months after enrollment. The relationship between the MARS and the CRS scores showed only a small overlap (correlation coefficient = 0.26). In the multivariate model, the only factor significantly associated with both patient and clinician ratings of adherence was psychopathology. Unemployment and poor subjective tolerability of antipsychotics were significantly associated with low levels of patient ratings of adherence. Conversely, length of treatments and use of newer antipsychotics were significantly associated with better clinician ratings of adherence. CONCLUSION: Patient and clinician ratings of adherence do not measure the same dimension. Factors that may positively affect adherence in terms of compliance with prescribed medication regimens may not affect patients' views on adherence, and this should be taken into consideration when planning and negotiating treatment modalities with each individual patient suffering from schizophrenia.

Understanding antipsychotic non-classical prescriptions: a quantitative and qualitative approach.

AIMS: To date only a few studies investigated the clinical reasons supporting and explaining non-classical antipsychotic prescriptions. The present study was carried out to develop concepts which help understand this phenomenon in a natural setting, giving emphasis to views of clinicians according to quali - quantitative research methodologies. SUBJECTS: From the South-Verona Psychiatric Case Register all antipsychotic prescriptions issued during 2005 were extracted. Concurrent prescribing of two or more antipsychotics, prescribing antipsychotic drugs outside the licensed indications, and outside the licensed ranges of doses reported in the Italian National Formulary, were considered non-classical prescriptions. Reasons for non-classical prescriptions were collected by means of brainstorming sessions with clinicians. Non-classical prescriptions and the corresponding reasons were grouped according to whether they were "clinically sound" or "clinically not sound". RESULTS: During 2005 a total of 259 patients received 376 non-classical prescriptions. The most frequently reported reasons for non-classical prescribing were that prescriptions were inherited from another clinician with or without benefit, and that prescriptions were motivated by the need of reducing psychotic symptoms. More than 60% of these non-classical prescriptions were categorised as "clinically sound". Clinically not sound prescriptions were related with negative clinicians' views and opinions about the patient/clinician relationship. CONCLUSION: Clinically not sound prescriptions appeared just a reflection of a problematic doctor/patient relationship, where no individual treatment plan existed and psychiatric visits had the only goal of monitoring ongoing prescriptions.

Assessment of cerebral blood volume in schizophrenia: A magnetic resonance imaging study.

Brain atrophy has consistently been observed in schizophrenia, representing a 'gross' evidence of anatomical abnormalities. Reduced cerebral blood volume (CBV) may accompany brain size decrement in schizophrenia, as suggested by prior small SPECT studies. In this study, we non-invasively investigated the hemisphere CBV in a large sample of patients suffering from schizophrenia with perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI). PWI images were obtained, following intravenous injection of paramagnetic contrast agent (Gadolinium-DTPA), for 54 DSM-IV patients with schizophrenia (mean age+/-SD=39.19+/-12.20 years; 34 males, 20 females) and 24 normal controls (mean age+/-SD=44.63+/-10.43 years; 9 males, 15 females) with a 1.5T Siemens magnet using an echo-planar sequence (TR=2160 ms, TE=47 ms, slice thickness=5mm). The contrast of enhancement (CE), a semi-quantitative parameter inversely estimating the CBV, were calculated pixel by pixel as the ratio of the maximum signal intensity drop during the passage of contrast agent (Sm) by the baseline pre-bolus signal intensity (So) (CE=Sm/Sox100) for right and left hemisphere on two axial images. Specifically, higher CE values correspond to lower CBV and viceversa Compared to normal controls, patients with schizophrenia had significantly higher bilateral hemisphere CE values (p=0.02) and inverse CE laterality index (p=0.02). This study showed abnormally reduced and inverse hemisphere CBV in a large population of patients with schizophrenia. Hypothetically, chronic low CBV may sustain neural hypoactivation and concomitant increase of free radicals, ultimately resulting in neuronal loss and cognitive impairments. Thus, altered intracranial hemodynamics may accompany brain atrophy and cognitive deficits, being a crucial factor in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia.