Individual and organizational outcomes of engaging peers in the cocreation of digital mental health interventions.

Within mental health services, persons in recovery from their own experiences of mental health challenges (peers) are increasingly being trained to provide peer support. This study describes individual and organizational outcomes related to engaging peers in a multisite demonstration project in California that sought to integrate them as cocreators throughout planning and implementation of digital mental health interventions. We collected data from key informants across 11 sites. Quarterly online surveys invited key informants to report perceived outcomes of the peer component. Biannual interviews elicited details regarding survey-reported outcomes. Quantitative data provided indications of outcome prevalence and consistency, and quotes from the interviews illustrated the complex realities underlying survey responses. One hundred three quarterly surveys and 39 biannual interviews were completed between Summer 2020 and Fall 2022. Key informants reported diverse outcomes, including integration of peer input into local decision making, mental health benefits to peers and community members, reduced workplace mental health stigma, and new cross-site collaborations. Five sites reported outcomes with greater consistency compared to the other six sites. Reports of increased peer visibility in the workplace coincided with reports of reduced stigma and increased value of peer input by mental health professionals. This study offers encouragement for the potential positive impact of engaging peers as cocreators of mental health interventions. Data suggest integrating peers does not increase mental health stigma and may instead result in various positive outcomes. The degree to which these outcomes manifest in a specific setting, however, may vary. Future research should seek to identify contextual factors that support actualization of positive outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Variability in the Integration of Peers in a Multi-site Digital Mental Health Innovation Project.

Peer support specialists ("peers") who have the lived experience of, and are in recovery from, mental health challenges are increasingly being integrated into mental health care as a reimbursable service across the US. This study describes the ways peers were integrated into Help@Hand, a multi-site innovation project that engaged peers throughout efforts to develop and offer digital mental health interventions across counties/cities ("sites") in California. Using a mixed methods design, we collected quantitative data via quarterly online surveys, and qualitative data via semi-annual semi-structured phone interviews with key informants from Help@Hand sites. Quantitative data were summarized as descriptive findings and qualitative data from interviews were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis methods. In the final analytic phase, interview quotes were used to illustrate the complex realities underlying quantitative responses. 117 quarterly surveys and 46 semi-annual interviews were completed by key informants from 14 sites between September 2020 and January 2023. Peers were integrated across diverse activities for support and implementation of digital mental health interventions, including development of training and educational materials (78.6% of sites), community outreach (64.3%), technology testing (85.7%), technology piloting (90.9%), digital literacy training (71.4%), device distribution (63.6%), technical assistance (72.7%), and cross-site collaboration (66.7%). Peer-engaged activities shifted over time, reflecting project phases. Peer-provided digital literacy training and technology-related support were key ingredients for project implementations. This study indicates the wide range of ways peers can be integrated into digital mental health intervention implementations. Considering contextual readiness for peer integration may enhance their engagement into programmatic activities.

Beyond access: Psychosocial barriers to undocumented students' use of mental health services.

RATIONALE: Little is known about how undocumented immigrants navigate healthcare utilization issues apart from access. OBJECTIVE: We examine a unique population of undocumented immigrants who have access to healthcare - college students at the University of California - to identify how immigration status hinders mental health service utilization in the absence of barriers related to eligibility and insurance coverage. METHOD: We conducted semistructured interviews between March and July 2017 with 30 undocumented students at a University of California campus. RESULTS: We argue that undocumented immigration status informs mental health-related illness cognitions to negatively affect students' ability to assess their own mental health and need for services. Students expressed low perceived need because they normalized mental strain as a natural product of their unstable immigration status. Many viewed treatment as futile because it could not address underlying immigration-related issues. They also anticipated stigmas associated with mental illness as well as their own undocumented status. CONCLUSION: Solutions to address utilization disparities must go beyond eliminating formal barriers to health access and address such psychosocial barriers, as well as the larger political and social context that produces them.

The Road to Resilience: Insights on Training Community Coalitions in the Los Angeles County Community Disaster Resilience Project.

OBJECTIVE: Local health departments (LHDs) have little guidance for operationalizing community resilience (CR). We explored how community coalitions responded to 4 CR levers (education, engagement, partnerships, and community self-sufficiency) during the first planning year of the Los Angeles County Community Disaster Resilience (LACCDR) Project. METHODS: Sixteen communities were selected and randomly assigned to the experimental CR group or the control preparedness group. Eight CR coalitions met monthly to plan CR-building activities or to receive CR training from a public health nurse. Trained observers documented the coalitions' understanding and application of CR at each meeting. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze structured observation reports around the 4 levers. RESULTS: Analysis of 41 reports suggested that coalitions underwent a process of learning about and applying CR concepts in the planning year. Groups resonated with ideas of education, community self-sufficiency, and engagement, but increasing partnerships was challenging. CONCLUSIONS: LHDs can support coalitions by anticipating the time necessary to understand CR and by facilitating engagement. Understanding the issues that emerge in the early phases of planning and implementing CR-building activities is critical. LHDs can use the experience of the LACCDR Project's planning year as a guide to navigate challenges and issues that emerge as they operationalize the CR model. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2016;10:812-821).