Dataset Information

Psychological Treatments for the World: Lessons from Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

ABSTRACT: Common mental disorders, including depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress, are leading causes of disability worldwide. Treatment for these disorders is limited in low- and middle-income countries. This systematic review synthesizes the implementation processes and examines the effectiveness of psychological treatments for common mental disorders in adults delivered by nonspecialist providers in low- and middle-income countries. In total, 27 trials met the eligibility criteria; most treatments targeted depression or posttraumatic stress. Treatments were commonly delivered by community health workers or peers in primary care or community settings; they usually were delivered with fewer than 10 sessions over 2-3 months in an individual, face-to-face format. Treatments included common elements, such as nonspecific engagement and specific domains of behavioral, interpersonal, emotional, and cognitive elements. The pooled effect size was 0.49 (95% confidence interval = 0.36-0.62), favoring intervention conditions. Our review demonstrates that psychological treatments-comprising a parsimonious set of common elements and delivered by a low-cost, widely available human resource-have moderate to strong effects in reducing the burden of common mental disorders.

SUBMITTER: Singla DR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5506549 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychological Treatments for the World: Lessons from Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Singla Daisy R DR Kohrt Brandon A BA Murray Laura K LK Anand Arpita A Chorpita Bruce F BF Patel Vikram V

Annual review of clinical psychology 20170501

Common mental disorders, including depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress, are leading causes of disability worldwide. Treatment for these disorders is limited in low- and middle-income countries. This systematic review synthesizes the implementation processes and examines the effectiveness of psychological treatments for common mental disorders in adults delivered by nonspecialist providers in low- and middle-income countries. In total, 27 trials met the eligibility criteria; most treatm ...[more]

PMID: 28482687

Similar Datasets

Project description:Common mental disorders (CMDs) constitute a major public health and economic burden on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Systematic reviews of economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs are limited. This systematic review examines methods, reports findings and appraises the quality of economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs in LMICs. We searched a range of bibliographic databases (including PubMed, EconLit, APA-PsycINFO and Cochrane library) and the African Journals Online (AJoL) and Google Scholar platforms. We used a pre-populated template to extract data and the Drummond & Jefferson checklist for quality appraisal. We present results as a narrative synthesis. The review included 26 studies, mostly from Asia (12) and Africa (9). The majority were cost-effectiveness analyses (12), some were cost-utility analyses (5), with one cost-benefit analysis or combinations of economic evaluations (8). Most interventions were considered either cost-effective or potentially cost-effective (22), with 3 interventions being not cost-effective. Limitations were noted regarding appropriateness of conclusions drawn on cost-effectiveness, the use of cost-effectiveness thresholds and application of 'societal' incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to reflect value for money (VfM) of treatments. Non-specialist health workers (NSHWs) delivered most of the treatments (16) for low-cost delivery at scale, and costs should reflect the true opportunity cost of NSHWs' time to support the development of a sustainable cadre of health care providers. There is a 4-fold increase in economic evaluations of CMD psychological treatments in the last decade over the previous one. Yet, findings from this review highlight the need for better application of economic evaluation methodology to support resource allocation towards the World Health Organization recommended first-line treatments of CMDs. We suggest impact inventories to capture societal economic gains and propose a VfM assessment framework to guide researchers in evaluating cost-effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundCommon mental disorders (CMDs) are highly prevalent conditions that constitute a major public health and economic burden on society in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite the increased demand for economic evidence to support resource allocation for scaled-up implementation of mental health services in these contexts, economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs remain scarce.ObjectiveThe proposed systematic review aims to synthesize findings on methods and outcomes of economic evaluations of psychological treatments for CMDs in LMICs and appraise quality.MethodsWe will identify, select, and extract data from published economic evaluations of psychological interventions for CMDs conducted in LMICs. We will search bibliographic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EconLit, PsycINFO, Africa-Wide Information, Cochrane library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry), and the African Journals Online (AJOL) and Google Scholar platforms. Only full economic evaluations (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), Cost-Utility Analysis (CUA), Cost-Consequence Analysis (CCA), or Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)) of psychological treatments for CMDs (defined as depressive, anxiety, and substance use disorders) conducted in LMICs will be included. There will be no restrictions based on date of publication, perspective, follow-up duration or sample size. Data extraction will be guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.ResultsThe results presented will be examined using a narrative synthesis approach. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the Drummond & Jefferson checklist.ConclusionThe fledgling evidence base in this area provides an opportunity to promote improved economic evaluation methods in line with repeated calls for economic evidence alongside effectiveness evidence in these settings. A rigorously developed economic evaluation evidence base will support resource allocation decisions for scaled up implementation of psychological interventions in LMIC settings.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020185277.

Project description:BackgroundAdjunctive psychological interventions for bipolar disorder have demonstrated better efficacy in preventing or delaying relapse and improving outcomes compared with pharmacotherapy alone.AimsTo evaluate the efficacy of psychological interventions for bipolar disorder in low- and middle-income countries.MethodA systematic review was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane database for systematic review, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Latin America and Caribbean Center on Health Science Literature and African Journals Online databases with no restriction of language or year of publication. Methodological heterogeneity of studies precluded meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 18 adjunctive studies were identified: psychoeducation (n = 14), family intervention (n = 1), group cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) (n = 2) and group mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) (n = 1). In total, 16 of the 18 studies were from upper-middle-income countries and none from low-income countries. All used mental health specialists or experienced therapists to deliver the intervention. Most of the studies have moderately high risk of bias. Psychoeducation improved treatment adherence, knowledge of and attitudes towards bipolar disorder and quality of life, and led to decreased relapse rates and hospital admissions. Family psychoeducation prevented relapse, decreased hospital admissions and improved medication adherence. CBT reduced both depressive and manic symptoms. MBCT reduced emotional dysregulation.ConclusionsAdjunctive psychological interventions alongside pharmacotherapy appear to improve the clinical outcome and quality of life of people with bipolar disorder in middle-income countries. Further studies are required to investigate contextual adaptation and the role of non-specialists in the provision of psychological interventions to ensure scalability and the efficacy of these interventions in low-income country settings.Declaration of interestNone.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with multiple long-term conditions requires understanding the existing care models to address their complex and multifaceted health needs. However, current literature lacks a comprehensive overview of the essential components, impacts, challenges, and facilitators of these care models, prompting this scoping review.MethodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Our search encompassed articles from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar. The World Health Organization's health system framework was utilized to synthesis the findings. This framework comprises six building blocks (service delivery, health workforce, health information systems, access to essential medicines, financing, and leadership/governance) and eight key characteristics of good service delivery models (access, coverage, quality, safety, improved health, responsiveness, social and financial risk protection, and improved efficiency). Findings were synthesized qualitatively to identify components, impacts, barriers, and facilitators of care models.ResultsA care model represents various collective interventions in the healthcare delivery aimed at achieving desired outcomes. The names of these care models are derived from core activities or major responsibilities, involved healthcare teams, diseases conditions, eligible clients, purposes, and care settings. Notable care models include the Integrated, Collaborative, Integrated-Collaborative, Guided, Nurse-led, Geriatric, and Chronic care models, as well as All-inclusive Care Model for the Elderly, IMPACT clinic, and Geriatric Patient-Aligned Care Teams (GeriPACT). Other care models (include Care Management Plus, Value Stream Mapping, Preventive Home Visits, Transition Care, Self-Management, and Care Coordination) have supplemented the main ones. Care models improved quality of care (such as access, patient-centeredness, timeliness, safety, efficiency), cost of care, and quality of life for patients that were facilitated by presence of shared mission, system and function integration, availability of resources, and supportive tools.ConclusionsCare models were implemented for the purpose of enhancing quality of care, health outcomes, cost efficiency, and patient satisfaction by considering careful recruitment of eligible clients, appropriate selection of service delivery settings, and robust organizational arrangements involving leadership roles, healthcare teams, financial support, and health information systems. The distinct team compositions and their roles in service provision processes differentiate care models.

Project description:BackgroundNigeria is a significant tobacco market and influential country in Africa. Nigeria ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in 2005. We reviewed Nigeria's tobacco control legislation since 2000 and compliance of the National Tobacco Control Act (NTCA) 2015 with the FCTC.MethodsWe reviewed the National Tobacco Control Bills 2011 (proposed by legislature) and 2014 (proposed by Executive), the NTCA 2015, and media stories on tobacco control from 2008 to 2017.ResultsThe NTCA, despite being more comprehensive than Nigeria's first Tobacco Smoking (Control) law of 1990, maintained provisions promoted by the tobacco industry, for example: allowing designated smoking areas in hospitality venues, higher educational institutions, and transportation venues; a loophole in the advertising restrictions allowing communications with consenting adults; and having the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) (which includes tobacco companies) on the National Tobacco Control Committee charged with working with the Ministry of Health to implement the law. The industry is also directly involved with the Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON) in preparing regulations on cigarette constituents and emissions. In an unprecedented step globally, the law requires that implementing regulations be approved by the National Assembly, giving the industry another opportunity to weaken this law further by lobbying the legislators to favor the industry. As of January 2018, the law was still not being enforced.ConclusionThe NTCA can be strengthened through implementation guidelines still being developed. The industry should be prevented from interfering with through MAN and SON, as required by FCTC Article 5.3.ImplicationsThe tobacco industry works to block Framework Convention on Tobacco Control implementation even after a country ratifies the treaty. The Nigerian case illustrates that it is essential for health authorities to remain vigilant and ensure that the tobacco industry does not play a decision-making role in the process of tobacco legislation and regulation either directly or indirectly. The unprecedented step of requiring approval of implementing regulations for the Nigerian law should not be allowed to become a precedent in other countries.

Dataset Information

Psychological Treatments for the World: Lessons from Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Publications

Psychological Treatments for the World: Lessons from Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets