Mental health workers' perspectives on the implementation of a peer support intervention in five countries: qualitative findings from the UPSIDES study.

OBJECTIVE: The introduction of peer support in mental health teams creates opportunities and challenges for both peer and non-peer staff. However, the majority of research on mental health workers' (MHWs) experiences with peer support comes from high-income countries. Using Peer Support In Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) is an international multicentre study, which aims at scaling up peer support for people with severe mental illness in Europe, Asia and Africa. This study investigates MHWs experiences with UPSIDES peer support. DESIGN: Six focus groups with MHWs were conducted approximately 18 months after the implementation of the UPSIDES peer support intervention. Transcripts were analysed with a descriptive approach using thematic content analysis. SETTING: Qualitative data were collected in Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel) and Pune (India). PARTICIPANTS: 25 MHWs (19 females and 6 males) from UPSIDES study sites in the UPSIDES Trial (ISRCTN26008944) participated. FINDINGS: Five overarching themes were identified in MHWs' discussions: MHWs valued peer support workers (PSWs) for sharing their lived experiences with service users (theme 1), gained trust in peer support over time (theme 2) and provided support to them (theme 3). Participants from lower-resource study sites reported additional benefits, including reduced workload. PSWs extending their roles beyond what MHWs perceived as appropriate was described as a challenge (theme 4). Perceptions about PSWs varied based on previous peer support experience, ranging from considering PSWs as equal team members to viewing them as service users (theme 5). CONCLUSIONS: Considering local context is essential in order to understand MHWs' views on the cooperation with PSWs. Especially in settings with less prior experience of peer support, implementers should make extra effort to promote interaction between MHWs and PSWs. In order to better understand the determinants of successful implementation of peer support in diverse settings, further research should investigate the impact of contextual factors (eg, resource availability and cultural values). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.

Implementation of peer support for people with severe mental health conditions in high-, middle- and low-income-countries: a theory of change approach.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder engagement is essential to the design, implementation and evaluation of complex mental health interventions like peer support. Theory of Change (ToC) is commonly used in global health research to help structure and promote stakeholder engagement throughout the project cycle. Stakeholder insights are especially important in the context of a multi-site trial, in which an intervention may need to be adapted for implementation across very different settings while maintaining fidelity to a core model. This paper describes the development of a ToC for a peer support intervention to be delivered to people with severe mental health conditions in five countries as part of the UPSIDES trial. METHODS: One hundred thirty-four stakeholders from diverse backgrounds participated in a total of 17 workshops carried out at six UPSIDES implementing sites across high-, middle- and low-income settings (one site each in India, Israel, Uganda and Tanzania; two sites in Germany). The initial ToC maps created by stakeholders at each site were integrated into a cross-site ToC map, which was then revised to incorporate additional insights from the academic literature and updated iteratively through multiple rounds of feedback provided by the implementers. RESULTS: The final ToC map divides the implementation of the UPSIDES peer support intervention into three main stages: preparation, implementation, and sustainability. The map also identifies three levels of actors involved in peer support: individuals (service users and peer support workers), organisations (and their staff members), and the public. In the UPSIDES trial, the ToC map proved especially helpful in characterising and distinguishing between (a) common features of peer support, (b) shared approaches to implementation and (c) informing adaptations to peer support or implementation to account for contextual differences. CONCLUSIONS: UPSIDES is the first project to develop a multi-national ToC for a mental health peer support intervention. Stakeholder engagement in the ToC process helped to improve the cultural and contextual appropriateness of a complex intervention and ensure equivalence across sites for the purposes of a multi-site trial. It may serve as a blueprint for implementing similar interventions with a focus on recovery and social inclusion among people with mental ill-health across diverse settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN26008944 (Registration Date: 30/10/2019).

Development of the UPSIDES global mental health training programme for peer support workers: Perspectives from stakeholders in low, middle and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Peer support in mental health is a low-threshold intervention with increasing evidence for enhancing personal recovery and empowerment of persons living with severe mental health conditions. As peer support spreads globally, there is a growing need for peer support training programmes that work well in different contexts and cultures. This study evaluates the applicability and transferability of implementing a manualised multi-national training programme for mental health peer support workers called UPSIDES from the perspective of different local stakeholders in high-, middle-, and low-income countries. METHOD: Data from seven focus groups across six study sites in Africa (Tanzania, Uganda), Asia (India, Israel), and Europe (Germany 2 sites) with 44 participants (3 service users, 7 peer support workers, 25 mental health staff members, 6 clinical directors and 3 local community stakeholders) were thematically analysed. RESULTS: 397 codes were identified, which were thematically analysed. Five implementation enablers were identified: (i) Enhancing applicability through better guidance and clarity of training programme management, (ii) provision of sufficient time for training, (iii) addressing negative attitudes towards peer support workers by additional training of organisations and staff, (iv) inclusion of core components in the training manual such as communication skills, and (v) addressing cultural differences of society, mental health services and discrimination of mental health conditions. DISCUSSION: Participants in all focus groups discussed the implementation of the training and peer support intervention to a greater extent than the content of the training. This is in line with growing literature of difficulties in the implementation of peer support including difficulties in hiring peer support workers, lack of funding, and lack of role clarity. The results of this qualitative study with stakeholders from different mental health settings worldwide emphasises the need to further investigate the successful implementation of peer support training. All results have been incorporated into the manualisation of the UPSIDES peer support training.

Perspectives of key informants before and after implementing UPSIDES peer support in mental health services: qualitative findings from an international multi-site study.

BACKGROUND: Peer support is an essential part of recovery-oriented care worldwide. Contextual factors have an impact on the implementation of peer support work. However, research has paid little attention to similarities and differences of implementation factors in settings varying by income-level and cultural values. The aim of this study is to assess the factors influencing the implementation of a peer support intervention across study sites in low-, middle- and high-income countries in line with the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHOD: 6 focus groups with a total of 54 key informants with relevant contextual (organisational) knowledge regarding implementation facilitators and barriers were conducted at six study sites Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel), and Pune (India) before and 1.5 years after the start of UPSIDES peer support. Transcripts were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Across study sites key informants reported benefits of peer support for service users and peer support workers as implementation facilitators. At study sites with lower resources, reduced workload for mental health workers and improved access to mental health services through peer support were perceived as implementation facilitators (CFIR Domain 1: Intervention characteristics). The degree of engagement of mental health workers (CFIR Domain 3: Inner Setting/Domain 4: Individuals involved) varied across study sites and was seen either as a barrier (low engagement) or a facilitator (high engagement). Across study sites, adequate training of peer support workers (CFIR Domain 5: Implementation process) was seen as animplementation facilitator, while COVID-19 as well as low resource availability were reported as implementation barriers (CFIR Domain 2: Outer setting). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of considering contextual factors when implementing peer support, including previous experience and perceived benefits. Particular attention should be given to organisational benefits such as workload reduction and the allocation of sufficient resources as key drivers in LMICs. In HICs, the potential of organisational benefits for successful implementation should be further investigated and promoted.

Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and mental health treatment parameters among Asian Indians residing in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Asian Indians in the United States experience psychological impacts from traumatic experiences, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. However, Asian Indians underutilize mental health services that are attributed to culturally contextualized barriers and preferences for seeking mental health services. To advance this literature, we uniquely examined associations of PTSD symptom severity with institutional and internal help-seeking barriers for mental health services and with psychotherapy preferences. METHOD: Participants were a community sample of 77 trauma-exposed Asian Indians residing in the southwest area of the United States (Mage = 31.61, 71.4% women). RESULTS: Multiple regression analyses indicated that institutional barriers marginally associated with greater PTSD symptom severity. Supplemental analyses on the institutional barrier domain scores indicated that more ageist attitudes associated with lower PTSD symptom severity (ß = -.52, p = .020), and more transportation difficulties associated with higher PTSD symptom severity (ß = .36, p = .039). Lastly, results indicated that greater preference for psychotherapist directiveness associated with lower PTSD symptom severity (ß = -.45, p = .016). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical implications can be viewed from a socioecological framework recognizing the interplay of societal, familial, and individual-level factors that influence PTSD symptom severity among Asian Indians. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Cost of implementing the QualityRights programme in public hospitals in Gujarat providing mental healthcare.

Background & objectives: Investment in mental health is quite meagre worldwide, including in India. The costs of new interventions must be clarified to ensure the appropriate utilization of available resources. The government of Gujarat implemented QualityRights intervention at six public mental health hospitals. This study was aimed to project the costs of scaling up of the Gujarat QualityRights intervention to understand the additional resources needed for a broader implementation. Methods: Economic costs of the QualityRights intervention were calculated using an ingredients-based approach from the health systems' perspective. Major activities within the QualityRights intervention included assessment visits, meetings, training of trainers, provision of peer support and onsite training. Results: Total costs of implementing the QualityRights intervention varied from Indian Rupees (₹) 0.59 million to ₹ 2.59 million [1United States Dollars (US $) = ₹ 74.132] across six intervention sites at 2020 prices with 69-79 per cent of the cost being time cost. Scaling up the intervention to the entire State of Gujarat would require about two per cent increase in financial investment, or about 7.5 per cent increase in total cost including time costs over and above the costs of usual care for people with mental health conditions in public health facilities across the State. Interpretation & conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that human resources were the major cost contributor of the programme. Given the shortage of trained human resources in the mental health sector, appropriate planning during the scale-up phase of the QualityRights intervention is required to ensure all staff members receive the required training, and the treatment is not compromised during this training phase. As only about two per cent increase in financial cost can improve the quality of mental healthcare significantly, the State government can plan for its scale-up across the State.

Societal and organisational influences on implementation of mental health peer support work in low-income and high-income settings: a qualitative focus group study.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the established evidence base for mental health peer support work, widespread implementation remains a challenge. This study aimed to explore societal and organisational influences on the implementation of peer support work in low-income and high-income settings. DESIGN: Study sites conducted two focus groups in local languages at each site, using a topic guide based on a conceptual framework describing eight peer support worker (PSW) principles and five implementation issues. Transcripts were translated into English and an inductive thematic analysis was conducted to characterise implementation influences. SETTING: The study took place in two tertiary and three secondary mental healthcare sites as part of the Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) study, comprising three high-income sites (Hamburg and Ulm, Germany; Be'er Sheva, Israel) and two low-income sites (Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; Kampala, Uganda) chosen for diversity both in region and in experience of peer support work. PARTICIPANTS: 12 focus groups were conducted (including a total of 86 participants), across sites in Ulm (n=2), Hamburg (n=2), Dar es Salaam (n=2), Be'er Sheva (n=2) and Kampala (n=4). Three individual interviews were also done in Kampala. All participants met the inclusion criteria: aged over 18 years; actual or potential PSW or mental health clinician or hospital/community manager or regional/national policy-maker; and able to give informed consent. RESULTS: Six themes relating to implementation influences were identified: community and staff attitudes, resource availability, organisational culture, role definition, training and support and peer support network. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multicountry study to explore societal attitudes and organisational culture influences on the implementation of peer support. Addressing community-level discrimination and developing a recovery orientation in mental health systems can contribute to effective implementation of peer support work. The relationship between societal stigma about mental health and resource allocation decisions warrants future investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.

Atmiyata, a community champion led psychosocial intervention for common mental disorders: A stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Gujarat, India.

BACKGROUND: While effective lay-health worker models for mental health care have been demonstrated through efficacy trials, there is limited evidence of the effectiveness of these models implemented in rural LMIC settings. AIM: To evaluate the impact of a volunteer community-led intervention on reduction in depression and anxiety symptoms and improvement in functioning, and social participation among people living in rural Gujarat, India. METHODS: Stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial was used to assess the effectiveness of delivery of psychosocial intervention across 645 villages in Mehsana district of Gujarat, India between April 2017 and August 2019. The primary outcome was an improvement in depression and/or anxiety symptoms assessed using GHQ-12 at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were improvement in (a) depression and anxiety (Patient Health Questionnaire, (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) & Self-Reporting Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20); b) quality of life (EQ- 5D); c) functioning (WHO-DAS-12), and social participation (Social Participation Scale SPS). Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the independent effect of the intervention. RESULTS: Out of a total of 1191 trial participants (608- intervention & 583-control), 1014 (85%) completed 3-month follow-up. In an adjusted analysis, participants in the intervention condition showed significant recovery from symptoms of depression or anxiety (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.2 to 4.6; p<0.05) at the end of 3-months, with effects sustained at 8-month follow-up (OR 3.0; 95% CI 1.6 to 5.9). Intervention participants had improved scores on the PHQ-9 (Adjusted mean difference (AMD) -1.8; 95%CI -3.0 to -0.6), and SRQ-20 (AMD -1.7; 95%CI -2.7 to -0.6), at 3-months and PHQ-9, GAD-7, SRQ-20, EQ-5D and WHO-DAS at 8 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that Atmiyata had a significant effect on recovery from symptoms of depression and anxiety with sustained effects at 8-month follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration details. The trial was registered prospectively with the "Clinical Trial Registry in India" (registry number: CTRI/2017/03/008139).

Young people's data governance preferences for their mental health data: MindKind Study findings from India, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.

Mobile devices offer a scalable opportunity to collect longitudinal data that facilitate advances in mental health treatment to address the burden of mental health conditions in young people. Sharing these data with the research community is critical to gaining maximal value from rich data of this nature. However, the highly personal nature of the data necessitates understanding the conditions under which young people are willing to share them. To answer this question, we developed the MindKind Study, a multinational, mixed methods study that solicits young people's preferences for how their data are governed and quantifies potential participants' willingness to join under different conditions. We employed a community-based participatory approach, involving young people as stakeholders and co-researchers. At sites in India, South Africa, and the UK, we enrolled 3575 participants ages 16-24 in the mobile app-mediated quantitative study and 143 participants in the public deliberation-based qualitative study. We found that while youth participants have strong preferences for data governance, these preferences did not translate into (un)willingness to join the smartphone-based study. Participants grappled with the risks and benefits of participation as well as their desire that the "right people" access their data. Throughout the study, we recognized young people's commitment to finding solutions and co-producing research architectures to allow for more open sharing of mental health data to accelerate and derive maximal benefit from research.

Mental health workers' perspectives on peer support in high-, middle- and low income settings: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Peer support is increasingly acknowledged as an integral part of mental health services around the world. However, most research on peer support comes from high-income countries, with little attention to similarities and differences between different settings and how these affect implementation. Mental health workers have an important role to play in integrating formal peer support into statutory services, and their attitudes toward peer support can represent either a barrier to or facilitator of successful implementation. Thus, this study investigates mental health workers' attitudes toward peer support across a range of high- (Germany, Israel), middle- (India), and low-income country (Tanzania, Uganda) settings. METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted in Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel), and Ahmedabad, Gujarat (India) with a total of 35 participants. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Participants across the study sites demonstrated overall positive attitudes towards peer support in mental health care, although some concerns were raised on potentially harmful effects of peer support such as negative role modelling and giving inadequate advice to service users. Notably, mental health workers from low- and middle-income countries described peer support workers as bridge-builders and emphasized the mutual benefits of peer support. Mental health workers' views on peer support workers' roles and role boundaries differed between sites. In some settings, mental health workers strongly agreed on the need for role clarity, whereas in others, mental health workers expressed mixed views, with some preferring blurred role boundaries. Regarding collaboration, mental health workers described peer support workers as supporters and utilizers, equal partners or emphasized a need for trust and commitment. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health workers' attitudes toward peer support workers were positive overall, but they also varied depending on local context, resources and previous experiences with peer support. This affected their conceptions of peer support workers' roles, role clarity, and collaboration. This study demonstrated that reconciling the need for local adaptations and safeguarding the core values of peer support is necessary and possible, especially when the implementation of recovery-oriented interventions such as peer support is accelerating worldwide.

Proportionate translation of study materials and measures in a multinational global health trial: methodology development and implementation.

OBJECTIVES: Current translation guidelines do not include sufficiently flexible translation approaches for different study materials. We aimed to develop a proportionate methodology to inform translation of all types of study materials in global health trials. DESIGN: The design included three stages: (1) categorisation of study materials, (2) integration of existing translation frameworks and (3) methodology implementation (Germany, India, Israel, Tanzania and Uganda) and refinement. PARTICIPANTS: The study population comprised 27 mental health service users and 27 mental health workers who were fluent in the local language in stage 7 (pretesting), and 54 bilingual mental health service users, aged 18 years or over, and able to give consent as judged by a clinician for step 9 (psychometric evaluation). SETTING: The study took place in preparation for the Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN26008944). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measure was the Social Inclusion Scale (SIS). RESULTS: The typology identifies four categories of study materials: local text, study-generated text, secondary measures and primary measure. The UPSIDES Proportionate Translation Methodology comprises ten steps: preparation, forward translation, reconciliation, back translation, review, harmonisation, pretesting, finalisation, psychometric evaluation and dissemination. The translated primary outcome measure for the UPSIDES Trial (SIS) demonstrated adequate content validity (49.3 vs 48.5, p=0.08), convergent validity and internal consistency (0.73), with minimal floor/ceiling effects. CONCLUSION: This methodology can be recommended for translating, cross-culturally adapting and validating all study materials, including standardised measures, in future multisite global trials. The methodology is particularly applicable to multi-national studies involving sites with differing resource levels. The robustness of the psychometric findings is limited by the sample sizes for each site. However, making this limitation explicit is preferable to the typical practice of not reporting adequate details about measure translation and validation. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.

Identifying challenges and recommendations for advancing global mental health implementation research: A key informant study of the National Institute of Mental Health Scale-Up Hubs.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored perspectives of researchers working with the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Scale-Up Hubs, consisting of research partnerships for scaling up mental health interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to: 1) identify common barriers to conducting impactful research on the implementation of evidence-based mental health services; and 2) provide recommendations to overcome these implementation challenges. METHODS: A sequential qualitative approach was employed. First, an open-ended survey was distributed to the 10 Scale-Up Hubs and NIMH program staff asking informants to identify challenges in conducting mental health implementation research in LMICs. Second, survey findings guided an in-person workshop to generate implementation recommendations to inform the field. RESULTS: In total, 46 respondents completed surveys, and 101 researchers attended the workshop. The workshop produced implementation recommendations for low-resource settings: 1) identifying impact of research on policy and practice; 2) sustaining careers of early researchers in global mental health; 3) engaging policymakers and donors to value mental health research; 4) supporting the workforce for delivering evidence-based treatments for mental disorders; and 5) promoting sustainability of programs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can strengthen collaboration between researchers and key stakeholders, and highlight important targets for improving mental health implementation research in LMICs.

Systematic evaluation of the QualityRights programme in public mental health facilities in Gujarat, India.

BACKGROUND: Recognising the significant extent of poor-quality care and human rights issues in mental health, the World Health Organization launched the QualityRights initiative in 2013 as a practical tool for implementing human rights standards including the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) at the ground level. AIMS: To describe the first large-scale implementation and evaluation of QualityRights as a scalable human rights-based approach in public mental health services in Gujarat, India. METHOD: This is a pragmatic trial involving implementation of QualityRights at six public mental health services chosen by the Government of Gujarat. For comparison, we identified three other public mental health services in Gujarat that did not receive the QualityRights intervention. RESULTS: Over a 12-month period, the quality of services provided by those services receiving the QualityRights intervention improved significantly. Staff in these services showed substantially improved attitudes towards service users (effect sizes 0.50-0.17), and service users reported feeling significantly more empowered (effect size 0.07) and satisfied with the services offered (effect size 0.09). Caregivers at the intervention services also reported a moderately reduced burden of care (effect size 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: To date, some countries are hesitant to reforming mental health services in line with the CRPD, which is partially attributable to a lack of knowledge and understanding about how this can be achieved. This evaluation shows that QualityRights can be effectively implemented even in resource-constrained settings and has a significant impact on the quality of mental health services.

Implementation of a comprehensive surveillance system for recording suicides and attempted suicides in rural India.

INTRODUCTION: WHO reports that 78 of the 140 low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not have a registration system for suicides and attempted suicides. Absence of data on suicide and attempted suicide in LMICs, which account for 79% of suicides worldwide, is a major impediment in understanding the magnitude of the problem and formulating prevention strategies to reduce suicide and self-harm. A comprehensive surveillance system has the potential to address this data gap. The objective of this study is to describe the development of a comprehensive surveillance system in rural India by adding a community based component and reflect on its added value in obtaining data on suicide and attempted suicide compared with relying only on hospital and police records. METHOD: The comprehensive system consists of three components. Community surveillance involved collecting information on suicides and attempted suicides from third party key informants such as village heads, teachers, priests, shopkeepers, private physicians, private hospitals and community health workers. The second component consisted of data from public health facilities. The final component consisted of suicide data from police records. Information was collected for a period of 12 months from August 2018 to July 2019 from 116 villages (population 377 276) in Gujarat, India. RESULTS: An average of 710 community informants were interviewed each month (mean: 6.72 informants per village). The community surveillance system identified 67 cases of suicide compared with 30 cases by hospital and police records (Cochran's Q test 67.9 p<0.01) and 70 attempted suicides compared with 51 from the hospital and police records (Cochran's Q test 66.6 p<0.01). DISCUSSION: This is the first report of implementing a large-scale comprehensive surveillance system for suicide and attempted suicide in a LMIC. The combination of community surveillance system and official data from hospital and police records addresses the problem of under-reporting of suicide and suicide attempts in India and other LMIC.

Challenges to peer support in low- and middle-income countries during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: A recent editorial urged those working in global mental health to "change the conversation" on coronavirus disease (Covid-19) by putting more focus on the needs of people with severe mental health conditions. UPSIDES (Using Peer Support In Developing Empowering mental health Services) is a six-country consortium carrying out implementation research on peer support for people with severe mental health conditions in high- (Germany, Israel), lower middle- (India) and low-income (Tanzania, Uganda) settings. This commentary briefly outlines some of the key challenges faced by UPSIDES sites in low- and middle-income countries as a result of Covid-19, sharing early lessons that may also apply to other services seeking to address the needs of people with severe mental health conditions in similar contexts. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED: The key take-away from experiences in India, Tanzania and Uganda is that inequalities in terms of access to mobile technologies, as well as to secure employment and benefits, put peer support workers in particularly vulnerable situations precisely when they and their peers are also at their most isolated. Establishing more resilient peer support services requires attention to the already precarious situation of people with severe mental health conditions in low-resource settings, even before a crisis like Covid-19 occurs. While it is essential to maintain contact with peer support workers and peers to whatever extent is possible remotely, alternatives to face-to-face delivery of psychosocial interventions are not always straightforward to implement and can make it more difficult to observe individuals' reactions, talk about emotional issues and offer appropriate support. CONCLUSIONS: In environments where mental health care was already heavily medicalized and mostly limited to medications issued by psychiatric institutions, Covid-19 threatens burgeoning efforts to pursue a more holistic and person-centered model of care for people with severe mental health conditions. As countries emerge from lockdown, those working in global mental health will need to redouble their efforts not only to make up for lost time and help individuals cope with the added stressors of Covid-19 in their communities, but also to regain lost ground in mental health care reform and in broader conversations about mental health in low-resource settings.

Evaluation of the SPIRIT Integrated Suicide Prevention Programme: study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial in rural Gujarat, India.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a major public health challenge globally and specifically in India where 36.6% and 24.3% of all suicides worldwide occur in women and men, respectively. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals uses suicide rate as one of two indicators for Target 3.4, aimed at reducing these deaths by one third by 2030. India has no examples of large-scale implementation of evidence-based interventions to prevent suicide; however, there is a sizeable evidence base to draw on for suicide prevention strategies that have been piloted in India or proven to be effective regionally or internationally. METHOD: The SPIRIT study is designed as a cluster-randomized superiority trial and uses mixed methods to evaluate the implementation, effectiveness and costs of an integrated suicide prevention programme consisting of three integrated interventions including (1) a secondary-school-based intervention to reduce suicidal ideation among adolescents, (2) a community storage facility intervention to reduce access to pesticides and (3) training for community health workers in recognition, management, and appropriate referral of people identified with high suicidal risk. DISCUSSION: Combining three evidence-based interventions that tackle suicide among high-risk groups may generate a synergistic impact in reducing suicides at the community level in rural areas in India. Examination of implementation processes throughout the trial will also help to prepare a roadmap for policymakers and researchers looking to implement suicide prevention interventions in other countries and at scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registry of Indian Council of Medical Research, India: CTRI/2017/04/008313. Registered on 7 April 2017. http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?trialid=18256&EncHid=&userName=SPIRIT Trial registry was last modified on 28 June 2019.

Peer support for people with severe mental illness versus usual care in high-, middle- and low-income countries: study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (UPSIDES-RCT).

BACKGROUND: Peer support is an established intervention involving a person recovering from mental illness supporting others with mental illness. Peer support is an under-used resource in global mental health. Building upon comprehensive formative research, this study will rigorously evaluate the impact of peer support at multiple levels, including service user outcomes (psychosocial and clinical), peer support worker outcomes (work role and empowerment), service outcomes (cost-effectiveness and return on investment), and implementation outcomes (adoption, sustainability and organisational change). METHODS: UPSIDES-RCT is a pragmatic, parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of using peer support in developing empowering mental health services (UPSIDES) at four measurement points over 1 year (baseline, 4-, 8- and 12-month follow-up), with embedded process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Research will take place in a range of high-, middle- and low-income countries (Germany, UK, Israel, India, Uganda and Tanzania). The primary outcome is social inclusion of service users with severe mental illness (N = 558; N = 93 per site) at 8-month follow-up, measured with the Social Inclusion Scale. Secondary outcomes include empowerment (using the Empowerment Scale), hope (using the HOPE scale), recovery (using Stages of Recovery) and health and social functioning (using the Health of the Nations Outcome Scales). Mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate mediators and moderators of effect and the implementation experiences of four UPSIDES stakeholder groups (service users, peer support workers, mental health workers and policy makers). A cost-effectiveness analysis examining cost-utility and health budget impact will estimate the value for money of UPSIDES peer support. DISCUSSION: The UPSIDES-RCT will explore the essential components necessary to create a peer support model in mental health care, while providing the evidence required to sustain and eventually scale-up the intervention in different cultural, organisational and resource settings. By actively involving and empowering service users, UPSIDES will move mental health systems toward a recovery orientation, emphasising user-centredness, community participation and the realisation of mental health as a human right. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN26008944. Registered on 30 October 2019.

Atmiyata, a community-led intervention to address common mental disorders: Study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Gujarat, India.

BACKGROUND: While lay-health worker models for mental health care have proven to be effective in controlled trials, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness and scalability of these models in rural communities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Atmiyata is a rural community-led intervention using local community volunteers, called Champions, to identify and provide a package of community-based interventions for mental health, including evidence-based counseling for persons with common mental disorders (CMD). METHODS: The impact of the Atmiyata intervention is evaluated through a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (SW-CRCT) with a nested economic evaluation. The trial is implemented across 10 sub-blocks (645 villages) in Mehsana district in the state of Gujarat, with a catchment area of 1.52 million rural adults. There are 56 primary health centers (PHCs) in Mehsana district and villages covered under these PHCs are equally divided into four groups of clusters of 14 PHCs each. The intervention is rolled out in a staggered manner in these groups of villages at an interval of 5 months. The primary outcome is symptomatic improvement measured through the GHQ-12 at a 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include: quality of life using the EURO-QoL (EQ- 5D), symptom improvement measured by the Self-Reporting Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20), functioning using the World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Scale (WHO-DAS-12), depression symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), anxiety symptoms using Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7), and social participation using the Social Participation Scale (SPS). Generalized linear mixed effects model is employed for binary outcomes and linear mixed effects model for continuous outcomes. A Return on Investment (ROI) analysis of the intervention will be conducted to understand whether the intervention generates any return on financial investments made into the project. DISCUSSION: Stepped wedge designs are increasingly used a design to evaluate the real-life effectiveness of interventions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first SW-CRCT in a low- and middle-income country evaluating the impact of the implementation of a community mental health intervention. The results of this study will contribute to the evidence on scaling-up lay health worker models for mental health interventions and contribute to the SW-CRCT literature in low- and middle-income countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered prospectively with the Clinical Trial Registry in India and the Clinical Trial Registry number- CTRI/2017/03/008139. URL http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/regtrial.php?modid=1&compid=19&EncHid=70845.17209. Date of registration- 20/03/2017.

Typology of modifications to peer support work for adults with mental health problems: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Peer support work roles are being implemented internationally, and increasingly in lower-resource settings. However, there is no framework to inform what types of modifications are needed to address local contextual and cultural aspects. AIMS: To conduct a systematic review identifying a typology of modifications to peer support work for adults with mental health problems. METHOD: We systematically reviewed the peer support literature following PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews (registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) on 24 July 2018: CRD42018094832). All study designs were eligible and studies were selected according to the stated eligibility criteria and analysed with standardised critical appraisal tools. A narrative synthesis was conducted to identify types of, and rationales for modifications. RESULTS: A total of 15 300 unique studies were identified, from which 39 studies were included with only one from a low-resource setting. Six types of modifications were identified: role expectations; initial training; type of contact; role extension; workplace support for peer support workers; and recruitment. Five rationales for modifications were identified: to provide best possible peer support; to best meet service user needs; to meet organisational needs, to maximise role clarity; and to address socioeconomic issues. CONCLUSIONS: Peer support work is modified in both pre-planned and unplanned ways when implemented. Considering each identified modification as a candidate change will lead to a more systematic consideration of whether and how to modify peer support in different settings. Future evaluative research of modifiable versus non-modifiable components of peer support work is needed to understand the modifications needed for implementation among different mental health systems and cultural settings.

A systematic review of influences on implementation of peer support work for adults with mental health problems.

PURPOSE: The evidence base for peer support work in mental health is established, yet implementation remains a challenge. The aim of this systematic review was to identify influences which facilitate or are barriers to implementation of mental health peer support work. METHODS: Data sources comprised online databases (n = 11), journal table of contents (n = 2), conference proceedings (n = 18), peer support websites (n = 2), expert consultation (n = 38) and forward and backward citation tracking. Publications were included if they reported on implementation facilitators or barriers for formal face-to-face peer support work with adults with a mental health problem, and were available in English, French, German, Hebrew, Luganda, Spanish or Swahili. Data were analysed using narrative synthesis. A six-site international survey [Germany (2 sites), India, Israel, Tanzania, Uganda] using a measure based on the strongest influences was conducted. The review protocol was pre-registered (Prospero: CRD42018094838). RESULTS: The search strategy identified 5813 publications, of which 53 were included. Fourteen implementation influences were identified, notably organisational culture (reported by 53% of papers), training (42%) and role definition (40%). Ratings on a measure using these influences demonstrated preliminary evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of the identified influences. CONCLUSION: The identified influences provide a guide to implementation of peer support. For services developing a peer support service, organisational culture including role support (training, role clarity, resourcing and access to a peer network) and staff attitudes need to be considered. The identified influences provide a theory base to prepare research sites for implementing peer support worker interventions.