RESUMO
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 (â¹) 0.59 million to â¹ 2.59 million [1United States Dollars (US $) = â¹ 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.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde , Hospitais Públicos , Humanos , Aconselhamento , Saúde Mental , Índia/epidemiologiaRESUMO
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.
RESUMO
Complex interventions combining multiple evidence-based strategies have gained substantial traction in suicide prevention across the world. However, implementing these interventions in real-life settings is fraught with several challenges, significant resource demands, and evidence on the merits of implementing complex interventions remains a topic of debate. This study explores the real-world experiences of implementing complex interventions, including challenges, lessons learned, and the way forward. Sixteen participants (nine leaders, five implementors, and two lived experience advocates) from varied professional backgrounds and experiences were purposively recruited from six high-income countries and one low- and middle-income country. Participants were encouraged to reflect on their experiences of implementing complex suicide prevention interventions in their specific country contexts. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify, organize, and offer real-world insights into challenges, lessons learned, and what is needed as the way forward. Important themes related to challenges and lessons learned emerged: (a) stakeholder characteristics, engagement, and dynamics; (b) resources such as funding priorities and capacity; (c) contextual factors including larger sociocultural beliefs, policies, and legislation surrounding suicide and its prevention; (d) nature of lived experience engagement; (e) design and approach to interventions; (f) delivery of interventions; and (g) the scope of evaluation. The study yielded important insights into practice recommendations related to the implementation of complex suicide prevention interventions on the ground. Important pathways for designing interventions, collaboration, and stakeholder engagement for future implementation efforts were discussed. These real-life experiences and lessons learned from international experts are critical in understanding and bridging the know-do gap. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Effective suicide prevention interventions are infrequently translated into practice and policy. One way to bridge this gap is to understand the influence of theoretical determinants on intervention delivery, adoption, and sustainment and lessons learned. This study aimed to examine barriers, facilitators and lessons learned from implementing complex suicide prevention interventions across the world. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study was a secondary analysis of a systematic review of complex suicide prevention interventions, following updated PRISMA guidelines. English published records and grey literature between 1990 and 2022 were searched on PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest, SCOPUS and CENTRAL. Related reports were organized into clusters. Data was extracted from clusters of reports on interventions and were mapped using the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: The most frequently-reported barriers were reported within the intervention setting and were related to the perceived appropriateness of interventions within settings; shared norms, beliefs; and maintaining formal and informal networks and connections. The most frequently reported facilitators concerned individuals' motivation, capability/capacity, and felt need. Lessons learned focused on the importance of tailoring the intervention, responding to contextual needs and the importance of community engagement throughout the process. CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the importance of documenting and analyzing important influences on implementation. The complex interplay between the contextual determinants and implementation is discussed. These findings contribute to a better understanding of barriers and facilitators salient for implementation of complex suicide prevention interventions.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Little is known about how complex, multilevel, and multicomponent suicide prevention interventions work in real life settings. Understanding the methods used to systematically adopt, deliver, and sustain these interventions could ensure that they have the best chance of unfolding their full effect. This systematic review aimed to examine the application and extent of utilisation of implementation science in understanding and evaluating complex suicide prevention interventions. METHODS: The review adhered to updated PRISMA guidelines and was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021247950). PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest, SCOPUS and CENTRAL were searched. All English-language records (1990-2022) with suicide and/or self-harm as the primary aims or targets of intervention were eligible. A forward citation search and a reference search further bolstered the search strategy. Interventions were considered complex if they consisted of three or more components and were implemented across two or more levels of socio-ecology or levels of prevention. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine records describing 19 complex interventions were identified. In 13 interventions, use of implementation science approaches, primarily process evaluations, was explicitly stated. However, extent of utilisation of implementation science approaches was found to be inconsistent and incomprehensive. LIMITATIONS: The inclusion criteria, along with a narrow definition of complex interventions may have limited our findings. CONCLUSION: Understanding the implementation of complex interventions is crucial for unlocking key questions about theory-practice knowledge translation. Inconsistent reporting and inadequate understanding of implementation processes can lead to loss of critical, experiential knowledge related to what works to prevent suicide in real world settings.
Assuntos
Ciência da Implementação , Prevenção do Suicídio , HumanosRESUMO
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).
Assuntos
Transtornos Mentais , Intervenção Psicossocial , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Transtornos Mentais/psicologia , Ansiedade/terapia , Transtornos de Ansiedade/terapia , ÍndiaRESUMO
It has been argued that effective action towards addressing a complex concern such as suicide requires a combination of evidence-based strategies. While these complex public health approaches have recently gained importance, little is known about their characteristics and what contributes to their complexity. The use of interchangeable terms such as multilevel, multicomponent, community based, and inconsistent definitions of these approaches creates confusion around what it is and what it is not. In practice, this disorder is reflected in a substantial variation in the design, implementation, and evaluation of complex approaches in suicide research. While it is impossible to resolve all existing inconsistencies in terminology, this review explores a range of terms and definitions to connote complex interventions. It aims to unpack multiple meanings of these terms and their diverse usage in suicide literature. The potential implications of this fluidity and plausible pathways to make sense of this complexity for suicide research are also discussed. With a shared understanding of what constitutes a complex intervention, we can expect to see an improved representation of the real-world complexities in our efforts to address suicide. This common language can also contribute toward quality implementation and dissemination and thereby advance our understanding of complex interventions.
Assuntos
Prevenção do Suicídio , Humanos , Saúde PúblicaRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Suicídio , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Índia/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , População Rural , Tentativa de SuicídioRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Serviços Comunitários de Saúde Mental/métodos , Aconselhamento/métodos , Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Transtornos Mentais/terapia , Serviços Comunitários de Saúde Mental/tendências , Humanos , Índia , Transtornos Mentais/psicologia , Escalas de Graduação Psiquiátrica , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , População Rural , Autorrelato , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
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.