Dataset Information

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary health care: a systematic review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mental health is an integral part of health and well-being and yet health systems have not adequately responded to the burden of mental disorders. Integrating mental health services into primary health care (PHC) is the most viable way of closing the treatment gap and ensuring that people get the mental health care they need. PHC was formally adapted by the World Health Organization (WHO), and they have since invested enormous amounts of resources across the globe to ensure that integration of mental health services into PHC works.

Methods

This review will use the SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type) framework approach to identify experiences of mental health integration into PHC; the findings will be reported using the "Best fit" framework synthesis. PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL) will be searched including other sources like the WHO website and OpenGrey database. Assessment of bias and quality will be done at study level using two separate tools to check for the quality of evidence presented. Data synthesis will take on two synergistic approaches (qualitative and quantitative studies). Synthesizing evidence from countries across the globe will provide useful insights into the experiences of integrating mental health services into PHC and how the barriers and challenges have been handled. The findings will be useful to a wide array of stakeholders involved in the implementation of the mental health integration into PHC.

Discussion

The SPIDER framework has been chosen for this review because of its suitable application to qualitative and mixed methods research and will be used as a guide when selecting articles for inclusion. Data extracted will be synthesized using the "Best fit" framework because it has been used before and proved its suitability in producing new conceptual models for explaining decision-making and possible behaviors. Synthesizing evidence from countries across the globe will provide useful insights into the experiences of integrating mental health services into PHC and how the barriers and challenges have been handled.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42016052000.

SUBMITTER: Wakida EK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6389192 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary health care: a systematic review protocol.

Wakida Edith K EK Akena Dickens D Okello Elialilia S ES Kinengyere Alison A Kamoga Ronald R Mindra Arnold A Obua Celestino C Talib Zohray M ZM

Systematic reviews 20170825 1

<h4>Background</h4>Mental health is an integral part of health and well-being and yet health systems have not adequately responded to the burden of mental disorders. Integrating mental health services into primary health care (PHC) is the most viable way of closing the treatment gap and ensuring that people get the mental health care they need. PHC was formally adapted by the World Health Organization (WHO), and they have since invested enormous amounts of resources across the globe to ensure th ...[more]

PMID: 28841908

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe objective of the review was to synthesize evidence of barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into PHC from existing literature. The structure of the review was guided by the SPIDER framework which involves the following: Sample or population of interest-primary care providers (PCPs); Phenomenon of Interest-integration of mental health services into primary health care (PHC); Design-influenced robustness and analysis of the study; Evaluation-outcomes included subjective outcomes (views and attitudes); and Research type-qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies.MethodsStudies that described mental health integration in PHC settings, involved primary care providers, and presented barriers/facilitators of mental health integration into PHC were included in the review. The sources of information included PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, the WHO website, and OpenGrey. Assessment of bias and quality was done using two separate tools: the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) qualitative checklist and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies.ResultsTwenty studies met the inclusion criteria out of the 3353 search results. The most frequently reported barriers to integration of mental health services into PHC were (i) attitudes regarding program acceptability, appropriateness, and credibility; (ii) knowledge and skills; (iii) motivation to change; (iv) management and/or leadership; and (v) financial resources. In order to come up with an actionable approach to addressing the barriers, these factors were further analyzed along a behavior change theory.DiscussionWe have shown that the integration of mental health services into PHC has been carried out by various countries. The analysis from this review provides evidence to inform policy on the existing barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the mental health integration policy option. Not all databases may have been exhausted.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO 2016 (Registration Number: CRD42016052000 ) and published in BMC Systematic Reviews August 2017.

Project description:BackgroundUptake of clinical guideline recommendations into routine practice requires changes in attitudes and behaviors of the health care providers. The World Health Organization (WHO) has heavily invested in public health and health promotion globally by developing policy recommendations to guide clinical practice; however, clinical guidelines are often not applied. The success of the implementation of any guidelines depends on consideration of existing barriers and adequately addressing them. Therefore, exploring the context specific barriers and facilitators affecting the primary care providers (PCPs) in Mbarara district, Uganda may provide a practical way of addressing the identified barriers thus influence the PCPs action towards integration of mental healthcare services into PHC.MethodsWe adopted a theoretical model of behavior change; Capability, Opportunity and Motivation developed to understand behavior (COM-B). This was a cross-sectional study which involved using a semi-structured qualitative interview guide to conduct in-depth interviews with PCP's (clinical officers, nurses and midwives).ResultsCapability - inadequacy in knowledge about mental disorders; more comfortable managing patients with a mental problem diagnosis than making a new one; knowledge about mental health was gained during pre-service training; no senior cadre to consultations in mental health; and burdensome to consult the Uganda Clinical Guidelines (UCG). Opportunity - limited supply of hard copies of the UCG; guidelines not practical for local setting; did not regularly deal with clients having mental illness to foster routine usage of the UCG; no sensitization about the UCG to the intended users; and no cues at the health centers to remind the PCPs to use UCG. Motivation - did not feel self-reliant; not seen the UCG at their health facilities; lack of trained mental health specialists; conflicting priorities; and no regulatory measures to encourage screening for mental health.ConclusionsEfforts to achieve successful integration of mental health services into PHC need to fit in the context of the implementers; thus the need to adapt the UCG into local context, have cues to enforce implementation, and optimize the available expertize (mental healthcare providers) in the process.

Project description:BackgroundAccording to the United Nation High Commissioner for Refugee Global Trends report in 2019, on average, there are 2.7 refugees per 1000 national population in high-income countries, where girls and women attributed to 48% of the refugee population. Evidence shows high prevalence of mental health disorder among women refugees in comparison to the general population. To our knowledge, no systematic reviews have addressed access to mental health services for refugee women. The aim of this study will be to examine existing barriers and facilitators to accessing mental health services for refugee women in leading high-income countries for refugee resettlement.MethodsWe designed and registered a study protocol for a systematic review. We will conduct a literature search (from inception onwards) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Research articles having a qualitative component (i.e., qualitative, mixed, or multi-method) will be eligible. Study populations of interest will be refugee women at any age that can receive mental health services in leading high-income countries for refugee resettlement (e.g., 14 countries from North America, Europe, and Oceania). Eligibility will be restricted to studies published in English. The primary outcome will be all barriers and facilitators related to accessing mental health services. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The study methodological quality (or bias) will be appraised using appropriate tools. Reporting will follow the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement. A narrative synthesis will be conducted, and summary of findings tables will be produced. As it will be a systematic review, without human participants' involvement, there will be no requirement for ethical approval.DiscussionThe systematic review will present key evidence on barriers and facilitators to access mental health services among refugee women in leading resettlement countries. The findings will be used to inform program developers, policymakers, and other stakeholders to enhance mental health services for refugee women. The final manuscript will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and scientific conferences.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020180369.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the prevalence of depression in Vietnam is on par with global rates, services for depression are limited. The government of Vietnam has prioritized enhancing depression care through primary healthcare (PHC) and efforts are currently underway to test and scale-up psychosocial interventions throughout the country. With these initiatives in progress, it is important to understand implementation factors that might influence the successful integration of depression services into PHC. As the implementers of these new interventions, primary care providers (PHPs) are well placed to provide important insight into implementation factors affecting the integration of depression services into PHC. This mixed-methods study examines factors at the individual, organizational and structural levels that may act as barriers and facilitators to the integration of depression services into PHC in Vietnam from the perspective of PHPs.MethodsData collection took place in Hanoi, Vietnam in 2014. We conducted semi-structured interviews with PHPs (n = 30) at commune health centres and outpatient clinics in one rural and one urban district of Hanoi. Theoretical thematic analysis was used to analyse interview data. We administered an online survey to PHPs at n = 150 randomly selected communes across Hanoi. N = 226 PHPs responded to the survey. We used descriptive statistics to describe the study variables acting as barriers and facilitators and used a chi-square test of independence to indicate statistically significant (p < .05) associations between study variables and the profession, location and gender of PHPs.ResultsIndividual-level barriers include low level of knowledge and familiarity with depression among PHPs. Organizational barriers include low resource availability in PHC and low managerial discretion. Barriers at the structural level include limited mental health training among all PHPs and the existing programmatic structure of PHC in Vietnam, which sets mental health apart from general services. Facilitators at the individual level include positive attitudes among PHPs towards people with depression and interest in undergoing enhanced training in depression service delivery.ConclusionsWhile facilitating factors at the individual level are encouraging, considerable barriers at the structural level must be addressed to ensure the successful integration of depression services into PHC in Vietnam.

Project description:Integration of services for patients with more than one diagnosed condition has intuitive appeal but it has been argued that the empirical evidence to support it is limited. We report the findings of a systematic review that sought to identify health system factors, extrinsic to the integration process, which either facilitated or hindered the integration of services for two common disorders, HIV and chronic non-communicable diseases. Findings were initially extracted and organized around a health system framework, followed by a thematic cross-cutting analysis and validation steps. Of the 150 articles included, 67% (n = 102) were from high-income countries. The articles explored integration with services for one or several chronic disorders, the most studied being alcohol or substance use disorders (47.7%), and mental health issues (29.5%). Four cross-cutting themes related to the health system were identified. The first and most common theme was the requirement for effective collaboration and coordination: formal and informal productive relationships throughout the system between providers and within teams, and between staff and patients. The second was the need for adequate and appropriately skilled and incentivized health workers-with the right expertise, training and operational support for the programme. The third was the need for supportive institutional structures and dedicated resources. The fourth was leadership in terms of political will, effective managerial oversight and organizational culture, indicating that actual implementation is as important as programme design. A fifth theme, outside the health system, but underpinning all aspects of the system operation, was that placing the patient at the centre of service delivery and responding holistically to their diverse needs. This was an important facilitator of integration. These findings confirm that integration processes in service delivery depend substantially for their success on characteristics of the health systems in which they are embedded.

Project description:BackgroundDigital mental health interventions (DMHIs) represent a promising solution to address the growing unmet mental health needs and increase access to care. Integrating DMHIs into clinical and community settings is challenging and complex. Frameworks that explore a wide range of factors, such as the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework, can be useful for examining multilevel factors related to DMHI implementation efforts.ObjectiveThis paper aimed to identify the barriers to, facilitators of, and best practice recommendations for implementing DMHIs across similar organizational settings, according to the EPIS domains of inner context, outer context, innovation factors, and bridging factors.MethodsThis study stems from a large state-funded project in which 6 county behavioral health departments in California explored the use of DMHIs as part of county mental health services. Our team conducted interviews with clinical staff, peer support specialists, county leaders, project leaders, and clinic leaders using a semistructured interview guide. The development of the semistructured interview guide was informed by expert input regarding relevant inner context, outer context, innovation factors, and bridging factors in the exploration, preparation, and implementation phases of the EPIS framework. We followed a recursive 6-step process to conduct qualitative analyses using inductive and deductive components guided by the EPIS framework.ResultsOn the basis of 69 interviews, we identified 3 main themes that aligned with the EPIS framework: readiness of individuals, readiness of innovations, and readiness of organizations and systems. Individual-level readiness referred to the extent to which clients had the necessary technological tools (eg, smartphones) and knowledge (digital literacy) to support the DMHI. Innovation-level readiness pertained to the accessibility, usefulness, safety, and fit of the DMHI. Organization- and system-level readiness concerned the extent to which providers and leadership collectively held positive views about DMHIs as well as the extent to which infrastructure (eg, staffing and payment model) was appropriate.ConclusionsThe successful implementation of DMHIs requires readiness at the individual, innovation, and organization and system levels. To improve individual-level readiness, we recommend equitable device distribution and digital literacy training. To improve innovation readiness, we recommend making DMHIs easier to use and introduce, clinically useful, and safe and adapting them to fit into the existing client needs and clinical workflow. To improve organization- and system-level readiness, we recommend supporting providers and local behavioral health departments with adequate technology and training and exploring potential system transformations (eg, integrated care model). Conceptualizing DMHIs as services allows the consideration of both the innovation characteristics of DMHIs (eg, efficacy, safety, and clinical usefulness) and the ecosystem around DMHIs, such as individual and organizational characteristics (inner context), purveyors and intermediaries (bridging factor), client characteristics (outer context), as well as the fit between the innovation and implementation settings (innovation factor).

Dataset Information

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary health care: a systematic review protocol.

Background

Methods

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Publications

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary health care: a systematic review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets