A survey of traditional and faith healers providing mental health care in three sub-Saharan African countries.

BACKGROUND: Traditional and faith healers constitute an important group of complementary and alternative mental health service providers (CAPs) in sub-Sahara Africa. Governments in the region commonly express a desire to integrate them into the public health system. The aim of the study was to describe the profile, practices and distribution of traditional and faith healers in three sub-Saharan African countries in great need for major improvements in their mental health systems namely Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mapping exercise of CAPs who provide mental health care was conducted in selected catchment areas in the three countries through a combination of desk review of existing registers, engagement activities with community leaders and a snowballing technique. Information was collected on the type of practice, the methods of diagnosis and the forms of treatment using a specially designed proforma. RESULTS: We identified 205 CAPs in Ghana, 406 in Kenya and 82 in Nigeria. Most (> 70%) of the CAPs treat both physical and mental illnesses. CAPs receive training through long years of apprenticeship. They use a combination of herbs, various forms of divination and rituals in the treatment of mental disorders. The use of physical restraints by CAPs to manage patients was relatively uncommon in Kenya (4%) compared to Nigeria (63.4%) and Ghana (21%). CAPs often have between 2- to 10-fold capacity for patient admission compared to conventional mental health facilities. The profile of CAPs in Kenya stands out from those of Ghana and Nigeria in many respects. CONCLUSION: CAPs are an important group of providers of mental health care in sub-Saharan Africa, but attempts to integrate them into the public health system must address the common use of harmful treatment practices.

Collaboration Between Biomedical and Complementary and Alternative Care Providers: Barriers and Pathways.

We examined the scope of collaborative care for persons with mental illness as implemented by traditional healers, faith healers, and biomedical care providers. We conducted semistructured focus group discussions in Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria with traditional healers, faith healers, biomedical care providers, patients, and their caregivers. Transcribed data were thematically analyzed. A barrier to collaboration was distrust, influenced by factionalism, charlatanism, perceptions of superiority, limited roles, and responsibilities. Pathways to better collaboration were education, formal policy recognition and regulation, and acceptance of mutual responsibility. This study provides a novel cross-national insight into the perspectives of collaboration from four stakeholder groups. Collaboration was viewed as a means to reach their own goals, rooted in a deep sense of distrust and superiority. In the absence of openness, understanding, and respect for each other, efficient collaboration remains remote. The strongest foundation for mutual collaboration is a shared sense of responsibility for patient well-being.

Effectiveness of traditional healers in treating mental disorders: a systematic review.

Traditional healers form a major part of the mental health workforce worldwide. Despite this, little systematic examination has been done of their effectiveness in treating mental illness or alleviating psychological distress. In this Review, we aim to fill this gap, with a focus on quantitative outcomes. We searched four databases and reference lists for papers that explicitly measured the effectiveness of traditional healers on mental illness and psychological distress. Eligible papers were assessed for quality, and outcomes and other details were extracted with the use of a standardised template. 32 eligible papers from 20 countries were included. The published literature on this topic is heterogeneous and studies are generally of poor quality, although some findings emerge more consistently. Some evidence suggests that traditional healers can provide an effective psychosocial intervention. Their interventions might help to relieve distress and improve mild symptoms in common mental disorders such as depression and anxiety. However, little evidence exists to suggest that they change the course of severe mental illnesses such as bipolar and psychotic disorders. Nevertheless, qualitative changes that are captured poorly by conventional rating scales might be as important as the quantitative changes reviewed here. We conclude by outlining the challenges involved in assessing the effectiveness of traditional healers.

The role of global traditional and complementary systems of medicine in the treatment of mental health disorders.

Traditional and complementary systems of medicine include a broad range of practices, which are commonly embedded in cultural milieus and reflect community beliefs, experiences, religion, and spirituality. Two major components of this system are discernible: complementary alternative medicine and traditional medicine, with different clientele and correlates of patronage. Evidence from around the world suggests that a traditional or complementary system of medicine is commonly used by a large number of people with mental illness. Practitioners of traditional medicine in low-income and middle-income countries fill a major gap in mental health service delivery. Although some overlap exists in the diagnostic approaches of traditional and complementary systems of medicine and conventional biomedicine, some major differences exist, largely in the understanding of the nature and cause of mental disorders. Treatments used by providers of traditional and complementary systems of medicine, especially traditional and faith healers in low-income and middle-income countries, might sometimes fail to meet widespread understandings of human rights and humane care. Nevertheless, collaborative engagement between traditional and complementary systems of medicine and conventional biomedicine might be possible in the care of people with mental illness. The best model to bring about that collaboration will need to be established by the needs of the extant mental health system in a country. Research is needed to provide an empirical basis for the feasibility of such collaboration, to clearly delineate its boundaries, and to test its effectiveness in bringing about improved patient outcomes.