Collaborative Care for Mental Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A WHO Health Systems Framework Assessment of Three Programs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Acharya B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5790311 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Collaborative Care for Mental Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A WHO Health Systems Framework Assessment of Three Programs.
Acharya Bibhav B Ekstrand Maria M Rimal Pragya P Ali Mohammed K MK Swar Sikhar S Srinivasan Krishnamachari K Mohan Viswanathan V Unützer Jürgen J Chwastiak Lydia A LA
Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 20170801 9
The collaborative care model is an evidence-based intervention for behavioral and other chronic conditions that has the potential to address the large burden of mental illness globally. Using the World Health Organization Health Systems Framework, the authors present challenges in implementing this model in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and discuss strategies to address these challenges based on experiences with three large-scale programs: an implementation research study in a distric ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The burden of mental illness is excessive, but many countries lack evidence-based policies to improve practice. Mental health research evidence translation into policymaking is a 'wicked problem', often failing despite a robust evidence base. In a recent systematic review, we identified a gap in frameworks on agenda setting and actionability, and pragmatic, effective tools to guide action to link research and policy are needed. Responding to this gap, we developed the new EVITA 1.1 (EVIdence To Agenda setting) conceptual framework for mental health research-policy interrelationships in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We (1) drafted a provisional framework (EVITA 1.0); (2) validated it for specific applicability to mental health; (3) conducted expert in-depth interviews to (a) validate components and mechanisms and (b) assess intelligibility, functionality, relevance, applicability and effectiveness. To guide interview validation, we developed a simple evaluation framework. (4) Using deductive framework analysis, we coded and identified themes and finalized the framework (EVITA 1.1). Theoretical agenda-setting elements were added, as targeting the policy agenda-setting stage was found to lead to greater policy traction. The framework was validated through expert in-depth interviews (n?=?13) and revised. EVITA 1.1 consists of six core components [advocacy coalitions, (en)actors, evidence generators, external influences, intermediaries and political context] and four mechanisms (capacity, catalysts, communication/relationship/partnership building and framing). EVITA 1.1 is novel and unique because it very specifically addresses the mental health research-policy process in LMICs and includes policy agenda setting as a novel, effective mechanism. Based on a thorough methodology, and through its specific design and mechanisms, EVITA has the potential to improve the challenging process of research evidence translation into policy and practice in LMICs and to increase the engagement and capacity of mental health researchers, policy agencies/planners, think tanks, NGOs and others within the mental health research-policy interface. Next, EVITA 1.1 will be empirically tested in a case study.
| S-EPMC7195852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Secondary schools in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) provide health promotion, preventive, and early intervention services. Nevertheless, literature indicates that the modules of these services are either adapted or modified from existing mental health programs in developed countries. The literature also highlights the provision of non-comprehensive services (mental health promotion, prevention, and early intervention), in LMICs. These findings inform the need for undertaking this systematic literature review. The aim of this review was thus to identify the modules of school-based mental health programs (SBMHP) that have been implemented in LMICs to guide the development of a culturally sensitive comprehensive mental health program for adolescents in a LMIC country. METHODS:The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was used to guide this review. The following databases were searched in September 2018, to identify the relevant literature: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and ERIC. The search was conducted by the first author and reviewed by the authors. RESULTS:Following the screening process, a total of 11 papers were identified and reviewed for quality. The systematic review highlighted that the mental health programs provided in schools included: an introduction module, a communication and relationship module, a psychoeducation module, a cognitive skills module, a behavioral skills module, establishing social networks for recovery and help seeking behavioral activities and a summary/conclusion module. CONCLUSION:This review sheds light on the characteristics of the programs in LMICs. Two programs were found to be universal in nature. Five programs were directed at key risk factors or at-risk groups, and four were early intervention programs. The review also revealed that only one program out of the 11 programs included modules for parents. The synthesis indicated that all the identified programs were adapted or modified from existing programs. The dearth of comprehensive programs in LMICs was also revealed. Lastly, the review revealed seven modules that can be useful for developing a SBMHP.
| S-EPMC7576731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConducting health impact assessments (HIAs) is a growing practice in various organizations and countries, yet scholarly interest in HIAs has primarily focused on the synergies between exposure and health outcomes. This limits our understanding of what factors influence HIAs and the uptake of their outcomes. This paper presents a framework for conducting participatory quantitative HIA (PQHIA) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including integrating the outcomes back into society after an HIA is conducted. The study responds to the question: what are the different components of a participatory quantitative model that can influence HIA implementation in LMICs?MethodsTo build the framework, we used a case study from a PQHIA fieldwork model developed in Port Louis (Mauritius). To explore thinking on the participatory components of the framework, we extract and analyze data from ethnographic material including fieldnotes, interviews, focus group discussions and feedback exercises with 14 stakeholders from the same case study. We confirm the validity of the ethnographic data using five quality criteria: credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and authenticity. We build the PQHIA framework connecting the main HIA steps with factors influencing HIAs.ResultsThe final framework depicts the five standard HIA stages and summarizes participatory activities and outcomes. It also reflects key factors influencing PQHIA practice and uptake of HIA outcomes: costs for participation, HIA knowledge and interest of stakeholders, social responsibility of policymakers, existing policies, data availability, citizen participation, multi-level stakeholder engagement and multisectoral coordination. The framework suggests that factors necessary to complete a participatory HIA are the same needed to re-integrate HIA results back into the society. There are three different areas that can act as facilitators to PQHIAs: good governance, evidence-based policy making, and access to resources.ConclusionsThe framework has several implications for research and practice. It underlines the importance of applying participatory approaches critically while providing a blueprint for methods to engage local stakeholders. Participatory approaches in quantitative HIAs are complex and demand a nuanced understanding of the context. Therefore, the political and cultural contexts in which HIA is conducted will define how the framework is applied. Finally, the framework underlines that participation in HIA does not need to be expensive or time consuming for the assessor or the participant. Yet, participatory quantitative models need to be contextually developed and integrated if they are to provide health benefits and be beneficial for the participants. This integration can be facilitated by investing in opportunities that fuel good governance and evidence-based policy making.
| S-EPMC7589915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a global drive to improve access to mental healthcare by scaling up integrated mental health into primary healthcare (PHC) systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).AimsTo investigate systems-level implications of efforts to scale-up integrated mental healthcare into PHC in districts in six LMICs.MethodSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 121 managers and service providers. Transcribed interviews were analysed using framework analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and World Health Organization basic building blocks.ResultsEnsuring that interventions are synergistic with existing health system features and strengthening of the healthcare system building blocks to support integrated chronic care and task-sharing were identified as aiding integration efforts. The latter includes (a) strengthening governance to include technical support for integration efforts as well as multisectoral collaborations; (b) ring-fencing mental health budgets at district level; (c) a critical mass of mental health specialists to support task-sharing; (d) including key mental health indicators in the health information system; (e) psychotropic medication included on free essential drug lists and (f) enabling collaborative and community- oriented PHC-service delivery platforms and continuous quality improvement to aid service delivery challenges in implementation.ConclusionsScaling up integrated mental healthcare in PHC in LMICs is more complex than training general healthcare providers. Leveraging existing health system processes that are synergistic with chronic care services and strengthening healthcare system building blocks to provide a more enabling context for integration are important.Declaration of interestNone.
| S-EPMC6688466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHealth systems responsiveness is a key objective of any health system, yet it is the least studied of all objectives particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. Research on health systems responsiveness highlights its multiple elements, for example, dignity and confidentiality. Little is known, however, about underlying theories of health systems responsiveness, and the mechanisms through which responsiveness works. This realist synthesis contributes to bridging these two knowledge gaps.Methods and analysisIn this realist synthesis, we will use a four-step process, comprising: mapping of theoretical bases, formulation of programme theories, theory refinement and testing of programme theories using literature and empirical data from Ghana and Vietnam. We will include theoretical and conceptual pieces, reviews, empirical studies and grey literature, alongside the primary data. We will explore responsiveness as entailing external and internal interactions within health systems. The search strategy will be purposive and iterative, with continuous screening and refinement of theories. Data extraction will be combined with quality appraisal, using appropriate tools. Each fragment of evidence will be appraised as it is being extracted, for its relevance to the emerging programme theories and methodological rigour. The extracted data pertaining to contexts, mechanisms and outcomes will be synthesised to identify patterns and contradictions. Results will be reported using narrative explanations, following established guidance on realist syntheses.Ethics and disseminationEthics approvals for the wider RESPONSE (Improving health systems responsiveness to neglected health needs of vulnerable groups in Ghana and Vietnam) study, of which this review is one part, were obtained from the ethics committees of the following institutions: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (ref: 22981), University of Leeds, School of Medicine (ref: MREC19-051), Ghana Health Service (ref: GHS-ERC 012/03/20) and Hanoi University of Public Health (ref: 020-149/DD-YTCC).We will disseminate results through academic papers, conference presentations and stakeholder workshops in Ghana and Vietnam.Prospero registration numberCRD42020200353. Full record: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020200353.
| S-EPMC8194331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:High disease burden and inadequate resources have formed the basis for advocacy to improve surgical care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Current measures are heavily focused on availability of resources rather than impact and fail to fully describe how surgery can be more integrated into health systems. We propose a new monitoring and evaluation framework of surgical care in LMICs to integrate surgical diseases into broader health system considerations and track efforts toward improved population health. Although more discussion is required, we seek to broaden the dialogue of how to improve surgical care in LMICs through this comprehensive framework.
| S-EPMC4757928 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW:The vast majority of research on the social determinants of mental health has been generated from high-income country (HIC) populations, even as the greatest health disparities, and greatest disease burden, is observed in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The goal of this review is to examine the evidence base on how key social epidemiology constructs relate to mental health in LMIC contexts. A special focus is on points of departure from the HIC knowledge base, gaps in overall understanding, and opportunities for social epidemiology to make a significant contribution. RECENT FINDINGS:A growing body of literature suggests that there is significant heterogeneity, both in the direction and magnitude, of association between factors such as socioeconomic status, income inequality, gender, and social networks/supports and mental health in LMIC. For example, higher levels of education and being married can be risk factors for worse mental health among women in certain contexts. However, many studies have methodological limitations that make causal inference difficult. Poverty alleviation interventions offer a unique opportunity to examine the impact of improving economic resources and mental health. SUMMARY:Much remains unknown about the impact of key social factors on mental health in LMIC. Findings from HICs may not apply to LMIC populations, since the meaning and distribution of a given social variable may differ significantly from what is commonly observed in HICs. These points of departure point to opportunities for social epidemiology to make a contribution to the field of global mental health.
| S-EPMC5488107 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), routine mental health information is unavailable or unreliable, making monitoring of mental healthcare coverage difficult. This study aims to evaluate a new set of mental health indicators introduced in primary healthcare settings in five LMIC.MethodA survey was conducted among primary healthcare workers (n = 272) to assess the acceptability and feasibility of eight new indicators monitoring mental healthcare needs, utilisation, quality and payments. Also, primary health facility case records (n = 583) were reviewed by trained research assistants to assess the level of completion (yes/no) for each of the indicators and subsequently the level of correctness of completion (correct/incorrect - with incorrect defined as illogical, missing or illegible information) of the indicators used by health workers. Assessments were conducted within 1 month of the introduction of the indicators, as well as 6-9 months afterwards.ResultsAcross both time points and across all indicators, 78% of the measurements of indicators were complete. Among the best performing indicators (diagnosis, severity and treatment), this was significantly higher. With regards to correctness, 87% of all completed indicators were correctly completed. There was a trend towards improvement over time. Health workers' perceptions on feasibility and utility, across sites and over time, indicated a positive attitude in 81% of all measurements.ConclusionThis study demonstrates high levels of performance and perceived utility for a set of indicators that could ultimately be used to monitor coverage of mental healthcare in primary healthcare settings in LMIC. We recommend that these indicators are incorporated into existing health information systems and adopted within the World Health Organization Mental Health Gap Action Programme implementation strategy.Declaration of interestNone.
| S-EPMC6688458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWork is integral to the occupations of human beings and accounts for up to a third of time spent in an average adult life. Occupational therapists play a role in vocational rehabilitation of mental health service users (MHSUs) with the aim of optimising their work participation. It is advisable that occupational therapists providing vocational rehabilitation to MHSUs with chronic mental illness in mental healthcare settings are guided by a practice framework developed for that particular context. This scoping review aims to summarise existing evidence on vocational rehabilitation for MHSUs in low-income to upper-middle-income countries. The findings will inform subsequent phases of research undertaken to formulate a vocational rehabilitation practice framework for MHSUs in Namibia.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will employ the five stage methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. This will be used in conjunction with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISM-ScR) and Joanna Briggs scoping review guidelines. MESH terms, Boolean operators and truncation strategies will be employed for a comprehensive article search in electronic scholarly databases. These databases will include PsycINFO, EBSCOhost, HINARI, Google scholar, Medline, CINAHL, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Science Direct and Wiley Online Library. Mendeley and Rayyan, both open source platforms, will be used for title, abstract and full-text screening, as well as data extraction. Data will be sifted and sorted by key categories and themes using a data charting form.Ethics and disseminationThe scoping review findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at local and international conferences. Ethical clearance for this study will not be required as secondary data will be utilised and there are no patients involved.
| S-EPMC8287089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThis systematic review compiled evidence on interventions to reduce mental health-related stigma in primary health care (PHC) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Studies targeting PHC staff (including non-professionals) were included. Primary outcomes were stigmatising attitudes and discriminatory behaviours.MethodsData collection included two strategies. First, previous systematic reviews were searched for studies that met the inclusion criteria of the current review. Second, a new search was done, covering the time since the previous reviews, i.e. January 2013 to May 2017. Five search concepts were combined in order to capture relevant literature: stigma, mental health, intervention, PHC staff and LMICs. A qualitative analysis of all included full-texts was done with software MAXQDA. Full-texts were analysed with regards to the content of interventions, didactic methods, mental disorders, cultural adaptation, type of outcome measure and primary outcomes. Furthermore, a risk of bias assessment was undertaken.ResultsA total of 18 studies were included. Risk of bias was rated as high in most included studies. Only six studies had tested their intervention against a control condition, two of which had used random allocation. Most frequently used interventions were lectures providing theoretical information. Many studies also used interactive methods (N = 9), discussed case studies (N = 8) or used role plays (N = 5). Three studies reported that they had used clinical practice and supervision. Results of these studies were mixed. No or little effects were found for brief training interventions (e.g. 1 h to 1 day). Longer training interventions with more sophisticated didactic methods produced statistically significant changes in validated stigma questionnaires. These results have to be interpreted with caution due to risk of bias. Methods for cultural adaptation of interventions were rarely documented.ConclusionsMore rigorous trials are needed in LMICs to test interventions that target discriminatory behaviours in relationship with patients. Cultural adaptation of stigma interventions and structural/institutional factors should be more explicitly addressed in such trials.
| S-EPMC6399081 | biostudies-literature