Anti-stigma interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Background: Stigma exacerbates power imbalances and societal disparities, significantly impacting diverse identities and health conditions, particularly for low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Though crucial for dismantling harmful stereotypes, and enhancing healthcare utilisation, existing research on anti-stigma interventions is limited with its condition-focused approach. We aimed to thoroughly evaluate peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature for a comprehensive review of anti-stigma interventions for diverse identities and all health conditions in LMICs. Methods: This review systematically explored peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature, in ten electronic databases up to January 30, 2024, covering all anti-stigma interventions across various stigmatised identities and health conditions in LMICs. Quality assessment for this systematic review was conducted as per Cochrane Collaboration's suggested inclusions. The review was registered with PROSPERO (Registration: 2017 CRD42017064283). Findings: Systematic synthesis of the 192 included studies highlights regional imbalances, while providing valuable insights on robustness and reliability of anti-stigma research. Most studies used quasi-experimental design, and most centred on HIV/AIDS or mental health related stigma, with very little work on other issues. Certain high-population LMICs had no/little representation. Interpretation: The interventions targeted diverse segments of populations and consequently yielded a multitude of stigma-related outcomes. However, despite the heterogeneity of studies, most reported positive outcomes underscoring the effectiveness of existing interventions to reduce stigma. Funding: This study is supported by the UK Medical Research Council Indigo Partnership (MR/R023697/1) award.

Social contact as a strategy to reduce stigma in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and expert perspectives.

Social contact (SC) has been identified as a promising strategy for stigma reduction. Different types of SC exist. Various scholars defined positive factors to strengthen SC. This study aims to investigate the application and effectiveness of SC as a strategy to reduce stigmatisation across stigmas, settings and populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We specifically examine the use of positive factors. A systematic review was conducted in twelve electronic databases using key terms related to stigma AND social contact AND intervention AND LMICs. Data were synthesised narratively. Study quality was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists. Additionally, semi-structured interviews were used with first/corresponding authors of included publications to investigate their practical experiences with SC. Forty-four studies (55 publications) were identified. Various stigmas (n = 16) were targeted, including mental health (43%). Indirect (n = 18) and direct contact (n = 16) were used most frequently, followed by collaboration, imagined and vicarious contact, or a combination. The most applied additional strategy was education. Almost half of the studies, explicitly or implicitly, described positive factors for SC, such as PWLE training or disconfirming stereotypes. The majority suggested that SC is effective in reducing stigma, although inconsistent reporting overshadows conclusions. Perspectives of people with lived experience (PWLE) were infrequently included. Expert perspectives stressed the importance of contextualisation, PWLE participation, and evaluation of SC. This study provides an overview of SC as a stigma reduction strategy within LMICs. Conclusions about which type of SC is more effective or whether SC is more effective for a specific stigma category cannot be drawn. We recommend future research to strengthen reporting on effectiveness as well as PWLE perspective and SC processes, and to further critically examine the potential of SC. An overview of positive factors applied to strengthen SC is provided, which can stimulate reflection and guide future SC.

A Case Study of the Development of a Valid and Pragmatic Implementation Science Measure: The Barriers and Facilitators in Implementation of Task-Sharing Mental Health Interventions (BeFITS-MH) Measure.

Background: Few implementation science (IS) measures have been evaluated for validity, reliability and utility - the latter referring to whether a measure captures meaningful aspects of implementation contexts. In this case study, we describe the process of developing an IS measure that aims to assess Barriers and Facilitators in Implementation of Task-Sharing in Mental Health services (BeFITS-MH), and the procedures we implemented to enhance its utility. Methods: We summarize conceptual and empirical work that informed the development of the BeFITS-MH measure, including a description of the Delphi process, detailed translation and local adaptation procedures, and concurrent pilot testing. As validity and reliability are key aspects of measure development, we also report on our process of assessing the measure's construct validity and utility for the implementation outcomes of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Results: Continuous stakeholder involvement and concurrent pilot testing resulted in several adaptations of the BeFITS-MH measure's structure, scaling, and format to enhance contextual relevance and utility. Adaptations of broad terms such as "program," "provider type," and "type of service" were necessary due to the heterogeneous nature of interventions, type of task-sharing providers employed, and clients served across the three global sites. Item selection benefited from the iterative process, enabling identification of relevance of key aspects of identified barriers and facilitators, and what aspects were common across sites. Program implementers' conceptions of utility regarding the measure's acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility were seen to cluster across several common categories. Conclusions: This case study provides a rigorous, multi-step process for developing a pragmatic IS measure. The process and lessons learned will aid in the teaching, practice and research of IS measurement development. The importance of including experiences and knowledge from different types of stakeholders in different global settings was reinforced and resulted in a more globally useful measure while allowing for locally-relevant adaptation. To increase the relevance of the measure it is important to target actionable domains that predict markers of utility (e.g., successful uptake) per program implementers' preferences. With this case study, we provide a detailed roadmap for others seeking to develop and validate IS measures that maximize local utility and impact.

Reducing stigma and improving access to care for people with mental health conditions in the community: protocol for a multi-site feasibility intervention study (Indigo-Local).

Background: Stigma and discrimination towards people with mental health conditions by their communities are common worldwide. This can result in a range of negative outcomes for affected persons, including poor access to health care. However, evidence is still patchy from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on affordable, community-based interventions to reduce mental health-related stigma and to improve access to mental health care. Methods: This study aims to conduct a feasibility (proof-of-principle) pilot study that involves developing, implementing and evaluating a community-based, multi-component, public awareness-raising intervention (titled Indigo-Local), designed to reduce stigma and discrimination and to increase referrals of people with mental health conditions for assessment and treatment. It is being piloted in five LMICs - China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal and Tunisia - and includes several key components: a stakeholder group workshop; a stepped training programme (using a 'Training of Trainers' approach) of community health workers (or similar cadres of workers) and service users that includes repeated supervision and booster sessions; awareness-raising activities in the community; and a media campaign. Social contact and service user involvement are instrumental to all components. The intervention is being evaluated through a mixed-methods pre-post study design that involves quantitative assessment of stigma outcomes measuring knowledge, attitudes and (discriminatory) behaviour; quantitative evaluation of mental health service utilization rates (where feasible in sites); qualitative exploration of the potential effectiveness and impact of the Indigo-Local intervention; a process evaluation; implementation evaluation; and an evaluation of implementation costs. Discussion: The outcome of this study will be contextually adapted, evidence-based interventions to reduce mental health-related stigma in local communities in five LMICs to achieve improved access to healthcare. We will have replicable models of how to involve people with lived experience as an integral part of the intervention and will produce knowledge of how intervention content and implementation strategies vary across settings. The interventions and their delivery will be refined to be acceptable, feasible and ready for larger-scale implementation and evaluation. This study thereby has the potential to make an important contribution to the evidence base on what works to reduce mental health-related stigma and discrimination and improve access to health care.

Toward a multi-level strategy to reduce stigma in global mental health: overview protocol of the Indigo Partnership to develop and test interventions in low- and middle-income countries.

There is increasing attention to the impacts of stigma and discrimination related to mental health on quality of life and access to and quality of healthcare. Effective strategies for stigma reduction exist, but most evidence comes from high-income settings. Recent reviews of stigma research have identified gaps in the field, including limited cultural and contextual adaptation of interventions, a lack of contextual psychometric information on evaluation tools, and, most notably, a lack of multi-level strategies for stigma reduction. The Indigo Partnership research programme will address these knowledge gaps through a multi-country, multi-site collaboration for anti-stigma interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal, and Tunisia). The Indigo Partnership aims to: (1) carry out research to strengthen the understanding of mechanisms of stigma processes and reduce stigma and discrimination against people with mental health conditions in LMICs; and (2) establish a strong collaborative research consortium through the conduct of this programme. Specifically, the Indigo Partnership involves developing and pilot testing anti-stigma interventions at the community, primary care, and mental health specialist care levels, with a systematic approach to cultural and contextual adaptation across the sites. This work also involves transcultural translation and adaptation of stigma and discrimination measurement tools. The Indigo Partnership operates with the key principle of partnering with people with lived experience of mental health conditions for the development and implementation of the pilot interventions, as well as capacity building and cross-site learning to actively develop a more globally representative and equitable mental health research community. This work is envisioned to have a long-lasting impact, both in terms of the capacity building provided to participating institutions and researchers, and the foundation it provides for future research to extend the evidence base of what works to reduce and ultimately end stigma and discrimination in mental health.

The PhotoVoice method for collaborating with people with lived experience of mental health conditions to strengthen mental health services.

There is a growing recognition of the benefits of collaborating with people with lived experience (PWLE) of mental health conditions in mental health research and implementation of services. Such collaboration has been effective in reducing mental health stigma and improving the quality of mental health care. Here, we describe using PhotoVoice as a collaborative method in which PWLE use visual narratives to tell their recovery stories for promoting social contact, debunking myths and reducing stigma. First, we outline the framework of this collaboration, drawing on theories from medical anthropology and social psychology and focusing on reducing mental health stigma among primary healthcare workers. Then, we describe the process using our learnings from implementing PhotoVoice in Nepal, Ethiopia and Uganda. We highlight collaboration in five key steps with associated considerations: (1) identifying PWLE for collaboration; (2) training in photography, distress management and presentation skills; (3) developing a photographic recovery story; (4) training healthcare workers using the PhotoVoice narratives; and (5) ongoing support of mental health systems strengthening in collaboration with PWLE. Then, we critically reflect on the process, highlighting the benefits and challenges to the participants and researchers, thereby paving the way for expanding collaborations with PWLE using the PhotoVoice method.

Training for mental health professionals in responding to experienced and anticipated mental health-related discrimination (READ-MH): protocol for an international multisite feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Mental health and other health professionals working in mental health care may contribute to the experiences of stigma and discrimination among mental health service users but can also help reduce the impact of stigma on service users. However, few studies of interventions to equip such professionals to be anti-stigma agents took place in high-income countries. This study assesses the feasibility, potential effectiveness and costs of Responding to Experienced and Anticipated Discrimination training for health professionals working in mental health care (READ-MH) across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: This is an uncontrolled pre-post mixed methods feasibility study of READ-MH training at seven sites across five LMICs (China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal and Tunisia). OUTCOME MEASURES: knowledge based on course content, attitudes to working to address the impact of stigma on service users and skills in responding constructively to service users' reports of discrimination. The training draws upon the evidence bases for stigma reduction, health advocacy and medical education and is tailored to sites through situational analyses. Its content, delivery methods and intensity were agreed upon through a consensus exercise with site research teams. READ-MH will be delivered to health professionals working in mental health care immediately after baseline data collection; outcome measures will be collected post-training and 3 months post-baseline, followed by qualitative data collection analysed using a combined deductive and inductive approach. Fidelity will be rated during the delivery of READ-MH, and data on training costs will be collected. Quantitative data will be assessed using generalised linear mixed models. Qualitative data will be evaluated by thematic analysis to identify feedback about the training methods and content, including the implementability of the knowledge and skills learned. Pooled and site-specific training costs per trainee and per session will be reported. CONCLUSIONS: The training development used a participatory and contextualised approach. Evaluation design strengths include the diversity of settings, the use of mixed methods, the use of a skills-based measure and the knowledge and attitude measures aligned to the target population and training. Limitations are the uncertain generalisability of skills performance to routine care and the impact of COVID-19 restrictions at several sites limiting qualitative data collection for situational analyses.

Mechanisms of action for stigma reduction among primary care providers following social contact with service users and aspirational figures in Nepal: an explanatory qualitative design.

BACKGROUND: There are increasing initiatives to reduce mental illness stigma among primary care providers (PCPs) being trained in mental health services. However, there is a gap in understanding how stigma reduction initiatives for PCPs produce changes in attitudes and clinical practices. We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial of a stigma reduction intervention in Nepal: REducing Stigma among HealthcAre Providers (RESHAPE). In a previous analysis of this pilot, we described differences in stigmatizing attitudes and clinical behaviors between PCPs receiving a standard mental health training (mental health Gap Action Program, mhGAP) vs. those receiving an mhGAP plus RESHAPE training. The goal of this analysis is to use qualitative interview data to explain the quantitative differences in stigma outcomes identified between the trial arms. METHODS: PCPs were randomized to either standard mental health training using mhGAP led by mental health specialists or the experimental condition (RESHAPE) in which service users living with mental illness shared photographic recovery narratives and participated in facilitated social contact. Qualitative interviews were conducted with PCPs five months post-training (n = 8, standard mhGAP training; n = 20, RESHAPE). Stigmatizing attitudes and clinical practices before and after training were qualitatively explored to identify mechanisms of change. RESULTS: PCPs in both training arms described changes in knowledge, skills, and confidence in providing mental healthcare. PCPs in both arms described a positive feedback loop, in which discussing mental health with patients encouraged more patients to seek treatment and open up about their illness, which demonstrated for PCPs that mental illness can be treated and boosted their clinical confidence. Importantly, PCPs in the RESHAPE arm were more likely to describe a willingness to treat mental health patients and attributed this in part to social contact with service users during the training. CONCLUSIONS: Our qualitative research identified testable mechanisms of action for stigma reduction and improving clinical behavior: specifically, recovery stories from service users and social engagement led to greater willingness to engage with patients about mental illness, triggering a feedback loop of more positive experiences with patients who benefit from mental healthcare, which further reinforces willingness to deliver mental healthcare. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02793271.

Implementation strategy in collaboration with people with lived experience of mental illness to reduce stigma among primary care providers in Nepal (RESHAPE): protocol for a type 3 hybrid implementation effectiveness cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are increasing efforts for the integration of mental health services into primary care settings in low- and middle-income countries. However, commonly used approaches to train primary care providers (PCPs) may not achieve the expected outcomes for improved service delivery, as evidenced by low detection rates of mental illnesses after training. One contributor to this shortcoming is the stigma among PCPs. Implementation strategies for training PCPs that reduce stigma have the potential to improve the quality of services. DESIGN: In Nepal, a type 3 hybrid implementation-effectiveness cluster randomized controlled trial will evaluate the implementation-as-usual training for PCPs compared to an alternative implementation strategy to train PCPs, entitled Reducing Stigma among Healthcare Providers (RESHAPE). In implementation-as-usual, PCPs are trained on the World Health Organization Mental Health Gap Action Program Intervention Guide (mhGAP-IG) with trainings conducted by mental health specialists. In RESHAPE, mhGAP-IG training includes the added component of facilitation by people with lived experience of mental illness (PWLE) and their caregivers using PhotoVoice, as well as aspirational figures. The duration of PCP training is the same in both arms. Co-primary outcomes of the study are stigma among PCPs, as measured with the Social Distance Scale at 6 months post-training, and reach, a domain from the RE-AIM implementation science framework. Reach is operationalized as the accuracy of detection of mental illness in primary care facilities and will be determined by psychiatrists at 3 months after PCPs diagnose the patients. Stigma will be evaluated as a mediator of reach. Cost-effectiveness and other RE-AIM outcomes will be assessed. Twenty-four municipalities, the unit of clustering, will be randomized to either mhGAP-IG implementation-as-usual or RESHAPE arms, with approximately 76 health facilities and 216 PCPs divided equally between arms. An estimated 1100 patients will be enrolled for the evaluation of accurate diagnosis of depression, generalized anxiety disorder, psychosis, or alcohol use disorder. Masking will include PCPs, patients, and psychiatrists. DISCUSSION: This study will advance the knowledge of stigma reduction for training PCPs in partnership with PWLE. This collaborative approach to training has the potential to improve diagnostic competencies. If successful, this implementation strategy could be scaled up throughout low-resource settings to reduce the global treatment gap for mental illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04282915 . Date of registration: February 25, 2020.

Training for mental health professionals in responding to experienced and anticipated mental health related discrimination (READ-MH): protocol for an international multisite feasibility study.

Background: Mental health and other health professionals working in mental health care may contribute to the experiences of stigma and discrimination among mental health service users, but can also help reduce the impact of stigma on service users. However the few studies of interventions to equip such professionals to be anti-stigma agents those took place in High-Income Countries. This study assesses the feasibility, potential effectiveness and costs of Responding to Experienced and Anticipated Discrimination training for health professionals working in mental health care (READ-MH) across Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). Methods: This is an uncontrolled pre-post mixed methods feasibility study of READ-MH training at seven sites across five LMICs (China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal, and Tunisia). Outcome measures: knowledge based on course content; attitudes to working to address the impact of stigma on service users; and skills in responding constructively to service users' reports of discrimination. The training draws upon the evidence bases for stigma reduction, health advocacy and medical education and is tailored to sites through situational analyses. Its content, delivery methods and intensity were agreed through a consensus exercise with site research teams. READ-MH will be delivered to health professionals working in mental health care immediately after baseline data collection; outcome measures will be collected post-training and three months post-baseline, followed by qualitative data collection. Fidelity will be rated during delivery of READ-MH, and data on training costs will be collected. Quantitative data will be assessed using generalised linear mixed models. Qualitative data will be evaluated by thematic analysis to identify feedback about the training methods and content, including the implementability of the knowledge and skills learned. Pooled and site-specific training costs per trainee and per session will be reported. Conclusions: The training development used a participatory and contextualized approach. Evaluation design strengths include the diversity of settings; the use of mixed methods; the use of a skills-based measure; and knowledge and attitude measures aligned to the target population and training. Limitations are the uncertain generalisability of skills performance to routine care, and the impact of COVID-19 restrictions at several sites limiting qualitative data collection for situational analyses.

Treatment Preferences for Pharmacological versus Psychological Interventions among Primary Care Providers in Nepal: Mixed Methods Analysis of a Pilot Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

There is increasing evidence supporting the effectiveness of psychological interventions in low- and middle-income countries. However, primary care providers (PCPs) may prefer treating patients with medication. A secondary exploratory analysis of a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate psychological vs. pharmacological treatment preferences among PCPs. Thirty-four health facilities, including 205 PCPs, participated in the study, with PCPs in 17 facilities assigned to a standard version of the mental health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) training delivered by mental health specialists. PCPs in the other 17 facilities received mhGAP instruction delivered by specialists and people with lived experience of mental illness (PWLE), using a training strategy entitled Reducing Stigma among HealthcAre ProvidErs (RESHAPE). Pre- and post- intervention attitudes were measured through quantitative and qualitative tools. Qualitative interviews with 49 participants revealed that PCPs in both arms endorsed counseling's benefits and collaboration within the health system to provide counseling. In the RESHAPE arm, PCPs were more likely to increase endorsement of statements such as "depression improves without medication" (F = 9.83, p < 0.001), "not all people with depression must be treated with antidepressants" (χ2 = 17.62, p < 0.001), and "providing counseling to people who have alcohol abuse problems is effective" (χ2 = 26.20, p < 0.001). These mixed-method secondary findings from a pilot trial suggest that in-person participation of PWLE in training PCPs may not only reduce stigma but also increase PCPs' support of psychological interventions. This requires further investigation in a full-scale trial.

Stigma against mental health disorders in Nepal conceptualised with a 'what matters most' framework: a scoping review.

AIMS: Stigma related to mental disorders is a barrier to quality mental healthcare. This scoping review aimed to synthesise literature on stigma related to mental disorders in Nepal to understand stigma processes. The anthropological concept of 'what matters most' to understand culture and stigma was used to frame the literature on explanatory models, manifestations, consequences, structural facilitators and mitigators, and interventions. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review with screening guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A structured search was done using three international databases (PsycINFO, Medline and Web of Science), one Nepali database (NepJol) and cross-referencing for publications from 1 January 2000 through 24 June 2020. The search was repeated to include structural stigma-related terms. Quality of quantitative studies was assessed using the Systematic Assessment of Quality in Observational Research (SAQOR) tool. The review was registered through the Open Science Framework (OSF) (osf.io/u8jhn). RESULTS: The searches yielded 57 studies over a 20-year period: 19 quantitative, 19 qualitative, nine mixed methods, five review articles, two ethnographies and three other types of studies. The review identified nine stigma measures used in Nepal, one stigma intervention, and no studies focused on adolescent and child mental health stigma. The findings suggest that 'what matters most' in Nepali culture for service users, caregivers, community members and health workers include prestige, productivity, privacy, acceptance, marriage and resources. Cultural values related to 'what matters most' are reflected in structural barriers and facilitators including lack of policies, programme planning and resources. Most studies using quantitative tools to assess stigma did not describe cultural adaptation or validation processes, and 15 out of the 18 quantitative studies were 'low-quality' on the SAQOR quality rating. The review revealed clear gaps in implementation and evaluation of stigma interventions in Nepal with only one intervention reported, and most stigma measures not culturally adapted for use. CONCLUSION: As stigma processes are complex and interlinked in their influence on 'what matters most' and structural barriers and facilitators, more studies are required to understand this complexity and establish effective interventions targeting multiple domains. We suggest that stigma researchers should clarify conceptual models to inform study design and interpretations. There is a need to develop procedures for the systematic cultural adaptation of stigma assessment tools. Research should be conducted to understand the forms and drivers of structural stigma and to expand intervention research to evaluate strategies for stigma reduction.

Evidence-based approaches for promoting gender equity in global mental health research: Study protocol for social network analysis of researchers in Nepal.

There are increasing efforts for capacity building of researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) to foster local ability to conduct high quality research. However, female researchers remain underrepresented in scientific communities, particularly in LMIC where they have limited networking and mentorship opportunities. This protocol is for a Social Network Analysis (SNA) to evaluate if gender-sensitive, need-based capacity building can improve researchers' networking and mentorship opportunities in Nepal. The conceptual framework is informed by Social Cognitive Career Theory. Cross-sectional and longitudinal SNA are used to a) assess individual researchers' network characteristics and their association with academic productivity; and b) examine if the association of network characteristics and academic productivity is mediated by self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Recruitment is designed to include early-career and senior researchers conducting mental health research, as well as students interested in pursuing a career in mental health research. The network characteristics will be mapped for approximately 150 researchers in working in Nepal. SNA characteristics in the network (individual density, homophily, and centrality) will be compared with academic productivity (total peer reviewed publications, h-index), including mediation effects via self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Ultimately, this study will generate information to design more evidence-based strategies for capacity building of a gender-equitable research workforce in global mental health.

Gender inequality in the global mental health research workforce: a research authorship scoping review and qualitative study in Nepal.

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.

Collaboration With People With Lived Experience of Mental Illness to Reduce Stigma and Improve Primary Care Services: A Pilot Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Collaboration with people with lived experience of mental illness (PWLE), also referred to as service users, is a growing priority to reduce stigma and improve mental health care. Objective: To examine feasibility and acceptability of conducting an antistigma intervention in collaboration with PWLE during mental health training of primary care practitioners (PCPs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 7, 2016, to August 10, 2018, with assessors, PCPs, and patients blinded to group assignment. The participants were PCPs and primary care patients diagnosed with depression, psychosis, or alcohol use disorder at primary care facilities (the cluster unit of randomization) in Nepal. Statistical analysis was performed from February 2020 to February 2021. Interventions: In the control group, PCPs were trained on the World Health Organization Mental Health Gap Action Programme-Intervention Guide (mhGAP-IG). In the Reducing Stigma Among Healthcare Providers (RESHAPE) group, the mhGAP-IG trainings for PCPs were cofacilitated by PWLE who presented recovery testimonials through photographic narratives. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prespecified feasibility and acceptability measures were adequacy of randomization, retention rates, intervention fidelity, data missingness, and safety. Outcome measures for PCPs included the Social Distance Scale (SDS), accuracy of diagnoses of mental illness in standardized role-plays using the Enhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic factors tool (ENACT), and accuracy of diagnosis with actual patients. The primary end point was 16 months posttraining. Results: Among the overall sample of 88 PCPs, 75 (85.2%) were men and 67 (76.1%) were upper caste Hindus; the mean (SD) age was 36.2 (8.8) years. Nine of the PCPs (10.2%) were physicians, whereas the remaining 79 PCPs (89.8%) were health assistants or auxiliary health workers. Thirty-four facilities were randomized to RESHAPE or the control group. All eligible PCPs participated: 43 in RESHAPE and 45 in the control group, with 76.7% (n = 33) and 73.3% (n = 33) retention at end line, respectively. Due to PCP dropout, 29 facilities (85.3%) were included in end line analysis. Of 15 PWLE trained as cofacilitators, 11 (73.3%) participated throughout the 3 months of PCP trainings. Among PCPs, mean SDS changes from pretraining to 16 months were -10.6 points (95% CI, -14.5 to -6.74 points) in RESHAPE and -2.79 points (-8.29 to 2.70 points) in the control group. Role-play-based diagnoses with ENACT were 78.1% (25 of 32) accurate in RESHAPE and 66.7% (22 of 33) in the control group. Patient diagnoses were 72.5% (29 of 40) accurate by PCPs in RESHAPE compared with 34.5% (10 of 29) by PCPs in the control group. There were no serious adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: This pilot cluster randomized clinical trial found that procedures were feasible and acceptable for PCPs to be trained by PWLE. These pilot results will help inform a full trial to evaluate benefits of collaboration with PWLE during training of PCPs to reduce stigma and improve diagnostic accuracy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02793271.

Perspectives of healthcare providers, service users, and family members about mental illness stigma in primary care settings: A multi-site qualitative study of seven countries in Africa, Asia, and Europe.

BACKGROUND: Stigma among healthcare providers is a barrier to the effective delivery of mental health services in primary care. Few studies have been conducted in primary care settings comparing the attitudes of healthcare providers and experiences of people with mental illness who are service users in those facilities. Such research is necessary across diverse global settings to characterize stigma and inform effective stigma reduction. METHODS: Qualitative research was conducted on mental illness stigma in primary care settings in one low-income country (Nepal), two lower-middle income countries (India, Tunisia), one upper-middle-income country (Lebanon), and three high-income countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy). Qualitative interviews were conducted with 248 participants: 64 primary care providers, 11 primary care facility managers, 111 people with mental illness, and 60 family members of people with mental illness. Data were analyzed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Primary care providers endorsed some willingness to help persons with mental illness but reported not having appropriate training and supervision to deliver mental healthcare. They expressed that people with mental illness are aggressive and unpredictable. Some reported that mental illness is incurable, and mental healthcare is burdensome and leads to burnout. They preferred mental healthcare to be delivered by specialists. Service users did not report high levels of discrimination from primary care providers; however, they had limited expectations of support from primary care providers. Service users reported internalized stigma and discrimination from family and community members. Providers and service users reported unreliable psychiatric medication supply and lack of facilities for confidential consultations. Limitations of the study include conducting qualitative interviews in clinical settings and reliance on clinician-researchers in some sites to conduct interviews, which potentially biases respondents to present attitudes and experiences about primary care services in a positive manner. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care providers' willingness to interact with people with mental illness and receive more training presents an opportunity to address stigmatizing beliefs and stereotypes. This study also raises important methodological questions about the most appropriate strategies to accurately understand attitudes and experiences of people with mental illness. Recommendations are provided for future qualitative research about stigma, such as qualitative interviewing by non-clinical personnel, involving non-clinical staff for recruitment of participants, conducting interviews in non-clinical settings, and partnering with people with mental illness to facilitate qualitative data collection and analysis.

Impact of Service User Video Presentations on Explicit and Implicit Stigma toward Mental Illness among Medical Students in Nepal: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

This study evaluated the impact of didactic videos and service user testimonial videos on mental illness stigma among medical students. Two randomized controlled trials were conducted in Nepal. Study 1 examined stigma reduction for depression. Study 2 examined depression and psychosis. Participants were Nepali medical students (Study 1: n = 94, Study 2: n = 213) randomized to three conditions: a didactic video based on the mental health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP), a service user video about living with mental illness, or a control condition with no videos. In Study 1, videos only addressed depression. In Study 2, videos addressed depression and psychosis. In Study 1, both didactic and service user videos reduced stigma compared to the control. In Study 2 (depression and psychosis), there were no differences among the three arms. When comparing Study 1 and 2, there was greater stigma reduction in the service user video arm with only depression versus service user videos describing depression and psychosis. In summary, didactic and service user videos were associated with decreased stigma when content addressed only depression. However, no stigma reduction was seen when including depression and psychosis. This calls for considering different strategies to address stigma based on types of mental illnesses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03231761.