Social determinants of psychological distress in Sierra Leone.

PURPOSE: Growing evidence demonstrates that daily stressors such as family violence, unemployment, and living conditions play an important part in causing psychological distress. This paper investigates the impact of distressing events and day-to-day living conditions on psychological distress in the fragile context of Sierra Leone. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 904 adults (454 men, 450 women) in 5 districts of Sierra Leone. The survey questionnaire comprised the Sierra Leone Psychological Distress scale and measures of demographic variables and personal characteristics, current life circumstances and potentially distressing events. RESULTS: Multiple regression results identified three factors to be the greatest contributors to psychological distress: family conflict (ß = 0.185, p < 0.001) and inability to afford basic needs (ß = 0.175, p < 0.001). Gender differences were evident: factors predicting men's psychological distress included severe sickness or injury (ß = 0.203, p < 0.001) and being unable to afford basic needs (ß = 0.190, p < 0.001); for women, predicting factors were family conflict (ß = 0.212, p < 0.001), perceived poor health (ß = 0.192, p < 0.001) and inability to afford basic needs (ß = 0.190, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Initiatives to promote good mental health and psychosocial wellbeing in Sierra Leone should focus on enhancing income-generating and employment opportunities, promoting access to education, and strengthening family relationships.

An analysis of policy and funding priorities of global actors regarding noncommunicable disease in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), including mental health, have become a major concern in low- and middle-income countries. Despite increased attention to them over the past decade, progress toward addressing NCDs has been slow. A lack of bold policy commitments has been suggested as one of the contributors to limited progress in NCD prevention and management. However, the policies of key global actors (bilateral, multilateral, and not-for-profit organisations) have been understudied. METHODS: This study aimed to map the key global actors investing in action regarding NCDs and review their policies to examine the articulation of priorities regarding NCDs. Narrative synthesis of 70 documents and 31 policy papers was completed, and related to data collated from the Global Health Data Visualisation Tool. RESULTS: In 2019 41% of development assistance for health committed to NCDs came from private philanthropies, while that for other global health priorities from this source was just 20%. Through a range of channels, bilateral donors were the other major source of NCD funding (contributing 41% of NCD funding). The UK and the US were the largest bilateral investors in NCDs, each contributing 8%. However, NCDs are still under-prioritised within bilateral portfolios - receiving just 0.48% of US funding and 1.66% of the UK. NGOs were the key channels of funding for NCDs, spending 48% of the funds from donors in 2019. The reviewed literature generally focused on NCD policies of WHO, with policies of multilateral and bilateral donors given limited attention. The analysis of policies indicated a limited prioritisation of NCDs in policy documents. NCDs are framed in the policies as a barrier to economic growth, poverty reduction, and health system sustainability. Bilateral donors prioritise prevention, while multilateral actors offer policy options for NCD prevention and care. Even where stated as a priority, however, funding allocations are not aligned. CONCLUSION: The growing threat of NCDs and their drivers are increasingly recognised. However, global actors' policy priorities and funding allocations need to align better to address these NCD threats. Given the level of their investment and engagement, more research is needed into the role of private philanthropies and NGOs in this area.

The development of a contextually appropriate measure of psychological distress in Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: Studies of psychological distress in Sierra Leone have typically used measures which were developed for use in other contexts, and which often have not been adapted or validated for use in Sierra Leone. This has resulted in a lack of reliable information about the patterns of psychological distress within the population, which is a barrier to the development of effective and appropriate mental health services. The aim of the study was to develop a locally-appropriate measure of psychological distress for Sierra Leone. METHODS: The new measure consists of two instruments: the Sierra Leone Psychological Distress Scale (SLPDS) and a gendered measure of ability to carry out daily tasks-a Function scale-as an indication of the severity of distress. A three-phase mixed methods exploratory sequential study was conducted. Phase 1 was item generation and testing, leading to the development of a set of potential items for both instruments. Phase 2 was a small pilot study (N = 202) leading to the selection of the final set of items for both measures. Phase 3 was a validation phase where the SLPDS and the Function scale were administered with a larger sample of 904 respondents. Item analysis was used to assess the internal consistency of the scales, and Exploratory Factor Analysis to explore the properties of the SLPDS. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis using the principal axis factoring with an oblique rotation identified a three-factor structure for the 18-item SLPDS. Internal consistency for the SLPDS (Cronbach's alpha = 0.89) and three subscales was good (Cronbach's alpha > 0.73). The internal reliability of the male and female versions of the Function scale was also found to be acceptable (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90 for the female scale and 0.79 for the male scale). CONCLUSIONS: Together the SLPD and Function scales provide a locally-validated tool which will enable government bodies and local and international non-governmental organisations in Sierra Leone to assess mental health and psychosocial needs. This will support both effective service provision and the evaluation of initiatives designed to improve mental health and psychosocial wellbeing.

The role of trust in health-seeking for non-communicable disease services in fragile contexts: A cross-country comparative study.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) disproportionately affect people living in fragile contexts marked by poor governance and health systems struggling to deliver quality services for the benefit of all. This combination can lead to the erosion of trust in the health system, affecting health-seeking behaviours and the ability of individuals to sustain their health. In this cross-country multiple-case study, we analyse the role of trust in health-seeking for NCD services in fragile contexts. Our analysis triangulates multiple data sources, including semi-structured interviews (n = 102) and Group Model Building workshops (n = 8) with individuals affected by NCDs and health providers delivering NCD services. Data were collected in Freetown and Makeni (Sierra Leone), Beirut and Beqaa (Lebanon), and Morazán, Chalatenango and Bajo Lempa (El Salvador) between April 2018 and April 2019. We present a conceptual model depicting key dynamics and feedback loops between contextual factors, institutional, interpersonal and social trust and health-seeking pathways. Our findings signal that firstly, the way health services are delivered and experienced shapes institutional trust in health systems, interpersonal trust in health providers and future health-seeking pathways. Secondly, historical narratives about public institutions and state authorities' responses to contextual fragility drivers impact institutional trust and utilisation of services from public health institutions. Thirdly, social trust mediates health-seeking behaviour through social bonds and links between health systems and individuals affected by NCDs. Given the repeated and sustained utilisation of health services required with these chronic diseases, (re)building and maintaining trust in public health institutions and providers is a crucial task in fragile contexts. This requires interventions at community, district and national levels, with a key focus on promoting links and mutual accountability between health systems and communities affected by NCDs.