Dataset Information

Implementation and use of the Mental Health Gap Action Programme Intervention Guide (mhGAP-IG): A review of the grey literature.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The World Health Organization (WHO)'s Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP)-Intervention Guide (IG) aims to integrate mental health into primary care/community-based settings by equipping non-specialists with tools, training, and support to deliver evidence-based interventions. With the growing popularity of the mhGAP-IG, a systematic review was conducted by Keynejad and colleagues (2018) to identify articles reporting on evidence generated from the implementation and evaluation of the mhGAP-IG in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Their review identified peer-reviewed articles and one thesis. In this current review, we report on the implementation and use of mhGAP-IG documented in the grey literature, an important and accessible channel to share information for LMICs.

Methods

We searched grey literature databases for documents that reported on the implementation and/or use of the mhGAP-IG or its training modules: ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, the Mental Health Innovation Network (MHIN) database, the WHO website, the mhGAP Newsletter, and the first 10 pages of Google search results. Authors developed and adapted search strategies according to database characteristics. Database searches were completed by November 12, 2019.

Results

One hundred and fifty-one (n = 151) documents were included in our review. We report on where the mhGAP-IG has been implemented and/or used worldwide. Many types of personnel were trained in the mhGAP-IG and/or used it in clinical practice. Contextual barriers and facilitators may influence the implementation and/or use of the mhGAP-IG, and we organized these according to structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation characteristics. Some information on evaluating the mhGAP-IG was documented in the grey literature. Outcomes included: feasibility of implementing and/or using the mhGAP-IG, its coverage, its impact on the capacities of personnel, patient outcomes, and policies, as well as program costs.

Conclusions

This review of the grey literature provides rich experiential knowledge that can complement information documented in the peer-reviewed literature. It is important for researchers conducting reviews on global health/global mental health topics to consider incorporating grey literature search strategies in their reviews. This may not only help to acknowledge the research/dissemination realities of many LMICs, but also to generate findings that reinforce and/or expand those documented in peer-reviewed articles.

SUBMITTER: Spagnolo J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8053394 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is a growing global need for scalable approaches to training and supervising primary care workers (PCWs) to deliver mental health services. Over the past decade, the World Health Organization Mental Health Gap Action Programme Intervention Guide (mhGAP-IG) and associated training and implementation guidance have been disseminated to more than 100 countries. On the basis of the opportunities provided by mobile technology, an updated electronic Mental Health Gap Action Programme Intervention Guide (e-mhGAP-IG) is now being developed along with a clinical dashboard and guidance for the use of mobile technology in supervision.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the feasibility, acceptability, adoption, and other implementation parameters of the e-mhGAP-IG for diagnosis and management of depression in 2 lower-middle-income countries (Nepal and Nigeria) and to conduct a feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) to evaluate trial procedures for a subsequent fully powered trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the e-mhGAP-IG and remote supervision with standard mhGAP-IG implementation.MethodsA feasibility cRCT will be conducted in Nepal and Nigeria to evaluate the feasibility of the e-mhGAP-IG for use in depression diagnosis and treatment. In each country, an estimated 20 primary health clinics (PHCs) in Nepal and 6 PHCs in Nigeria will be randomized to have their staff trained in e-mhGAP-IG or the paper version of mhGAP-IG v2.0. The PHC will be the unit of clustering. All PCWs within a facility will receive the same training (e-mhGAP-IG vs paper mhGAP-IG). Approximately 2-5 PCWs, depending on staffing, will be recruited per clinic (estimated 20 health workers per arm in Nepal and 15 per arm in Nigeria). The primary outcomes of interest will be the feasibility and acceptability of training, supervision, and care delivery using the e-mhGAP-IG. Secondary implementation outcomes include the adoption of the e-mhGAP-IG and feasibility of trial procedures. The secondary intervention outcome-and the primary outcome for a subsequent fully powered trial-will be the accurate identification of depression by PCWs. Detection rates before and after training will be compared in each arm.ResultsTo date, qualitative formative work has been conducted at both sites to prepare for the pilot feasibility cRCT, and the e-mhGAP-IG and remote supervision guidelines have been developed.ConclusionsThe incorporation of mobile digital technology has the potential to improve the scalability of mental health services in primary care and enhance the quality and accuracy of care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04522453; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04522453.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/24115.

Project description:AimsStigma can have a negative impact on help-seeking behaviour, treatment adherence and recovery of people with mental disorders. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of the WHO Mental Health Treatment Gap Interventions Guidelines (mhGAP-IG) to reduce stigma in face-to-face contacts during interventions for specific DSM-IV/ICD 10 diagnoses over a 6-month period.MethodsThis study was conducted in 20 health facilities across Makueni County in southeast Kenya which has one of the poorest economies in the country and has no psychiatrist or clinical psychologist. We recruited 2305 participants from the health facilities catchment areas that had already been exposed to community mental health services. We measured stigma using DISC-12 at baseline, followed by training to the health professionals on intervention using the WHO mhGAP-IG and then conducted a follow-up DISC-12 assessment after 6 months. Proper management of the patients by the trained professionals would contribute to the reduction of stigma in the patients.ResultsThere was 59.5% follow-up at 6 months. Overall, there was a significant decline in 'reported/experienced discrimination' following the interventions. A multivariate linear mixed model regression indicated that better outcomes of 'unfair treatment' scores were associated with: being married, low education, being young, being self-employed, higher wealth index and being diagnosed with depression. For 'stopping self' domain, better outcomes were associated with being female, married, employed, young, lower wealth index and a depression diagnosis. In regards to 'overcoming stigma' domain; being male, being educated, employed, higher wealth index and being diagnosed with depression was associated with better outcomes.ConclusionsThe statistically significant (p < 0.05) reduction of discrimination following the interventions by trained health professionals suggest that the mhGAP-IG may be a useful tool for reduction of discrimination in rural settings in low-income countries.

Project description:BackgroundInadequacy in mental health care in low and middle income countries has been an important contributor to the rising global burden of disease. The treatment gap is salient in resource-poor settings, especially when providing care for conflict-affected forced migrant populations. Primary care is often the only available service option for the majority of forced migrants, and integration of mental health into primary care is a difficult task. The proposed pilot study aims to explore the feasibility of integrating mental health care into primary care by providing training to primary care practitioners serving displaced populations, in order to improve identification, treatment, and referral of patients with common mental disorders via the World Health Organization Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP).Methods/designThis pilot randomized controlled trial will recruit 86 primary care practitioners (PCP) serving in the Puttalam and Mannar districts of Sri Lanka (with displaced and returning conflict-affected populations). The intervention arm will receive a structured training program based on the mhGAP intervention guide. Primary outcomes will be rates of correct identification, adequate management based on set criteria, and correct referrals of common mental disorders. A qualitative study exploring the attitudes, views, and perspectives of PCP on integrating mental health and primary care will be nested within the pilot study. An economic evaluation will be carried out by gathering service utilization information.DiscussionIn post-conflict Sri Lanka, an important need exists to provide adequate mental health care to conflict-affected internally displaced persons who are returning to their areas of origin after prolonged displacement. The proposed study will act as a local demonstration project, exploring the feasibility of formulating a larger-scale intervention study in the future, and is envisaged to provide information on engaging PCP, and data on training and evaluation including economic costs, patient recruitment, and acceptance and follow-up rates. The study should provide important information on the WHO mhGAP intervention guide to add to the growing evidence base of its implementation.Trial registrationSLCTR/2013/025.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Prior meta-analysis indicates that collaborative chronic care models (CCMs) improve mental and physical health outcomes for individuals with mental disorders. This study aimed to investigate the stability of evidence over time and identify patient and intervention factors associated with CCM effects to facilitate implementation and sustainability of CCMs in clinical practice. METHODS:We reviewed 53 CCM trials that analyzed depression, mental quality of life (QOL), or physical QOL outcomes. Cumulative meta-analysis and metaregression were supplemented by descriptive investigations across and within trials. RESULTS:Most trials targeted depression in the primary care setting, and cumulative meta-analysis indicated that effect sizes favoring CCM quickly achieved significance for depression outcomes, and more recently achieved significance for mental and physical QOL. Four of 6 CCM elements (patient self-management support, clinical information systems, system redesign, and provider decision support) were common among reviewed trials, whereas 2 elements (health care organization support and linkages to community resources) were rare. No single CCM element was statistically associated with the success of the model. Similarly, metaregression did not identify specific factors associated with CCM effectiveness. Nonetheless, results within individual trials suggest that increased illness severity predicts CCM outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:Significant CCM trials have been derived primarily from 4 original CCM elements. Nonetheless, implementing and sustaining this established model will require health care organization support. Although CCMs have typically been tested as population-based interventions, evidence supports stepped care application to more severely ill individuals. Future priorities include developing implementation strategies to support adoption and sustainability of the model in clinical settings while maximizing fit of this multicomponent framework to local contextual factors.

Project description:BackgroundThe Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, or PARIHS, is a conceptual framework that posits key, interacting elements that influence successful implementation of evidence-based practices. It has been widely cited and used as the basis for empirical work; however, there has not yet been a literature review to examine how the framework has been used in implementation projects and research. The purpose of the present article was to critically review and synthesize the literature on PARIHS to understand how it has been used and operationalized, and to highlight its strengths and limitations.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative, critical synthesis of peer-reviewed PARIHS literature published through March 2009. We synthesized findings through a three-step process using semi-structured data abstraction tools and group consensus.ResultsTwenty-four articles met our inclusion criteria: six core concept articles from original PARIHS authors, and eighteen empirical articles ranging from case reports to quantitative studies. Empirical articles generally used PARIHS as an organizing framework for analyses. No studies used PARIHS prospectively to design implementation strategies, and there was generally a lack of detail about how variables were measured or mapped, or how conclusions were derived. Several studies used findings to comment on the framework in ways that could help refine or validate it. The primary issue identified with the framework was a need for greater conceptual clarity regarding the definition of sub-elements and the nature of dynamic relationships. Strengths identified included its flexibility, intuitive appeal, explicit acknowledgement of the outcome of 'successful implementation,' and a more expansive view of what can and should constitute 'evidence.'ConclusionsWhile we found studies reporting empirical support for PARIHS, the single greatest need for this and other implementation models is rigorous, prospective use of the framework to guide implementation projects. There is also need to better explain derived findings and how interventions or measures are mapped to specific PARIHS elements; greater conceptual discrimination among sub-elements may be necessary first. In general, it may be time for the implementation science community to develop consensus guidelines for reporting the use and usefulness of theoretical frameworks within implementation studies.