RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Given the high rates of common mental disorders and limited resources, task-shifting psychosocial interventions are needed to provide adequate care. One such intervention developed by the World Health Organization is Problem Management Plus (PM+). AIMS: This review maps the evidence regarding the extent of application and usefulness of the PM+ intervention, i.e. adaptability, feasibility, effectiveness and scalability, since it was introduced in 2016. METHOD: We conducted a scoping review of seven literature databases and grey literature from January 2015 to February 2024, to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature on PM+ around the world. RESULTS: Out of 6739 potential records, 42 met the inclusion criteria. About 60% of the included studies were from low- and middle-income countries. Findings from pilot/feasibility trials demonstrated that PM+ is feasible, acceptable and safe. Results from definitive randomised controlled trials at short-term follow-up also suggested that PM+ is effective, with overall moderate-to-large effect sizes, in improving symptoms of common mental health problems. Although PM+ was more effective in reducing symptoms of common mental disorders, it was found to be costlier compared to usual care in the only study that evaluated its cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that PM+, in its individual and group formats, can be adapted and effectively delivered by trained helpers to target a wide range of common mental health concerns. More effectiveness and implementation evidence is required to understand the long-term impact of PM+, its cost-effectiveness and scalability, and moderators of treatment outcomes such as gender and delivery formats.
RESUMO
Background: The psychometric properties of the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5) are undocumented in Kenya and sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) at large. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Swahili version of the tool, S-PC-PTSD-5, in a community sample of adults 18 years and older drawn from Nairobi, Mombasa and Kwale counties in Kenya. Methods: Analysis of cross-sectional data from 1431 adults from the community was conducted, examining the reliability, factorial structure, measurement invariance, and convergent and divergent validity of the interviewer-administered S-PC-PTSD-5. Results: Out of 1431 adults who completed the S-PC-PTSD-5, 666 (46.5%) reported experiencing at least one traumatic event. Internal consistency of the S-PC-PTSD-5 was good overall, with alpha and omega values above 0.7. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results indicated a one-factor structure of the S-PC-PTSD-5 for the overall sample. Multigroup CFA also demonstrated factorial invariance for sex for the one-factor structure of S-PC-PTSD-5. Scores for S-PC-PTSD-5 significantly correlated (positively) with those of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD7) and depressive symptoms (PHQ9), indicating convergent validity. S-PC-PTSD-5 scores also significantly correlated (negatively) with the WHO-5 wellbeing index, supporting divergent validity. Conclusions: The S-PC-PTSD-5 is a reliable and valid unidimensional measure. It appears to be a valuable screening measure for probable PTSD in both urban and rural community settings in Kenya. Nonetheless, to confidently identify those who may need treatment/additional support, further research on the reliability and validity of S-PC-PTSD-5 is required, especially its diagnostic accuracy at different cutoff scores.