Jonathan Lamb

Access to mental health in primary care: A qualitative meta-synthesis of evidence from the experience of people from 'hard to reach' groups.

Knowledge about depression, access and help-seeking has increasingly been influenced from a range of disciplines including clinical and applied social science. A range of interventions can improve outcomes of depression and anxiety. However, many in need do not seek help, or their interaction with care-givers does not address their needs. We carried out a systematic search for qualitative articles focusing on the experiences of eight exemplar groups with exceptional problems in access (the homeless, long-term unemployed, adolescents with eating disorders, depressed elderly people, advanced cancer sufferers, patients with medically unexplained symptoms, asylum seekers and people from black and minority ethnic groups). Twenty articles representing these groups were selected, findings were then developed using qualitative meta-synthesis, this suggested a range of mechanisms accounting for poor access among these groups. Many regarded their mental health problems as rooted in social problems and employed a variety of self-management strategies to maintain function. These strategies could involve social withdrawal, focusing available resources on close family relationships and work roles. Over-investment in these roles could result in a sense of insecurity as wider networks were neglected. Material disadvantage affected both the resources people could bring to performing social roles and influenced help-seeking. A tacit understanding of the material, psychological and social ‘costs’ of engagement by patients and health professionals could influence decisions to seek and offer help. These costs were felt to be proportionally higher in deprived, marginalized and minority communities, where individual resources are limited and the stigma attached to mental ill-health is high.

Researching the mental health needs of hard-to-reach groups: managing multiple sources of evidence.

BackgroundCommon mental health problems impose substantial challenges to patients, carers, and health care systems. A range of interventions have demonstrable efficacy in improving the lives of people experiencing such problems. However many people are disadvantaged, either because they are unable to access primary care, or because access does not lead to adequate help. New methods are needed to understand the problems of access and generate solutions. In this paper we describe our methodological approach to managing multiple and diverse sources of evidence, within a research programme to increase equity of access to high quality mental health services in primary care.MethodsWe began with a scoping review to identify the range and extent of relevant published material, and establish key concepts related to access. We then devised a strategy to collect - in parallel - evidence from six separate sources: a systematic review of published quantitative data on access-related studies; a meta-synthesis of published qualitative data on patient perspectives; dialogues with local stakeholders; a review of grey literature from statutory and voluntary service providers; secondary analysis of patient transcripts from previous qualitative studies; and primary data from interviews with service users and carers.We synthesised the findings from these diverse sources, made judgements on key emerging issues in relation to needs and services, and proposed a range of potential interventions. These proposals were debated and refined using iterative electronic and focus group consultation procedures involving international experts, local stakeholders and service users.ConclusionsOur methods break new ground by generating and synthesising multiple sources of evidence, connecting scientific understanding with the perspectives of users, in order to develop innovative ways to meet the mental health needs of under-served groups.

Improving access to psychosocial interventions for common mental health problems in the United Kingdom: narrative review and development of a conceptual model for complex interventions.

BackgroundIn the United Kingdom and worldwide, there is significant policy interest in improving the quality of care for patients with mental health disorders and distress. Improving quality of care means addressing not only the effectiveness of interventions but also the issue of limited access to care. Research to date into improving access to mental health care has not been strongly rooted within a conceptual model, nor has it systematically identified the different elements of the patient journey from identification of illness to receipt of care. This paper set out to review core concepts underlying patient access to mental health care, synthesise these to develop a conceptual model of access, and consider the implications of the model for the development and evaluation of interventions for groups with poor access to mental health care such as older people and ethnic minorities.MethodsNarrative review of the literature to identify concepts underlying patient access to mental health care, and synthesis into a conceptual model to support the delivery and evaluation of complex interventions to improve access to mental health care.ResultsThe narrative review adopted a process model of access to care, incorporating interventions at three levels. The levels comprise (a) community engagement (b) addressing the quality of interactions in primary care and (c) the development and delivery of tailored psychosocial interventions.ConclusionsThe model we propose can form the basis for the development and evaluation of complex interventions in access to mental health care. We highlight the key methodological challenges in evaluating the overall impact of access interventions, and assessing the relative contribution of the different elements of the model.

Community Engagement in a complex intervention to improve access to primary mental health care for hard‐to‐reach groups

Despite the availability of effective evidence‐based treatments for depression and anxiety, many ‘harder‐to‐reach’ social and patient groups experience difficulties accessing treatment. We developed a complex intervention, the AMP (Improving Access to Mental Health in Primary Care) programme, which combined community engagement (CE), tailored (individual and group) psychosocial interventions and primary care involvement.

Development and evaluation of culturally sensitive psychosocial interventions for under-served people in primary care

BackgroundPsychological therapy is effective for symptoms of mental distress, but many groups with high levels of mental distress face significant barriers in terms of access to care, as current interventions may not be sensitive to their needs or their understanding of mental health. There is a need to develop forms of psychological therapy that are acceptable to these groups, feasible to deliver in routine settings, and clinically and cost effective.MethodsWe developed a culturally sensitive wellbeing intervention with individual, group and sign-posting elements, and tested its feasibility and acceptability for patients from ethnic minorities and older people in an exploratory randomised trial.ResultsWe recruited 57 patients (57% of our target) from 4 disadvantaged localities in the NW of England. The results of the exploratory trial suggest that the group receiving the wellbeing interventions improved compared to the group receiving usual care. For elders, the largest effects were on CORE-OM and PHQ-9. For ethnic minority patients, the largest effect was on PHQ-9. Qualitative data suggested that patients found the intervention acceptable, both in terms of content and delivery.ConclusionsThis exploratory trial provides some evidence of the efficacy and acceptability of a wellbeing intervention for older and ethnic minority groups experiencing anxiety and depression, although challenges in recruitment and engagement remain. Evidence from our exploratory study of wellbeing interventions should inform new substantive trial designs.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN68572159

Evaluating a complex model designed to increase access to high quality primary mental health care for under-served groups: a multi-method study

BackgroundMany people with mental distress are disadvantaged because care is not available or does not address their needs. In order to increase access to high quality primary mental health care for under-served groups, we created a model of care with three discrete elements: community engagement, primary care training and tailored wellbeing interventions. We have previously demonstrated the individual impact of each element of the model. Here we assess the effectiveness of the combined model in increasing access to and improving the quality of primary mental health care. We test the assumptions that access to the wellbeing interventions is increased by the presence of community engagement and primary care training; and that quality of primary mental health care is increased by the presence of community engagement and the wellbeing interventions.MethodsWe implemented the model in four under-served localities in North-West England, focusing on older people and minority ethnic populations. Using a quasi-experimental design with no-intervention comparators, we gathered a combination of quantitative and qualitative information. Quantitative information, including referral and recruitment rates for the wellbeing interventions, and practice referrals to mental health services, was analysed descriptively. Qualitative information derived from interview and focus group responses to topic guides from more than 110 participants. Framework analysis was used to generate findings from the qualitative data.ResultsAccess to the wellbeing interventions was associated with the presence of the community engagement and the primary care training elements. Referrals to the wellbeing interventions were associated with community engagement, while recruitment was associated with primary care training. Qualitative data suggested that the mechanisms underlying these associations were increased awareness and sense of agency. The quality of primary mental health care was enhanced by information gained from our community mapping activities, and by the offer of access to the wellbeing interventions. There were variable benefits from health practitioner participation in community consultative groups. We also found that participation in the wellbeing interventions led to increased community engagement.ConclusionsWe explored the interactions between elements of a multilevel intervention and identified important associations and underlying mechanisms. Further research is needed to test the generalisability of the model.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials, reference ISRCTN68572159. Registered 25 February 2013.

What is Asset-Based Community Development and How Might It Improve the Health of People With Long-Term Conditions? A Realist Synthesis

Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) appears to be a promising way to supporting people with long-term health problems but there is currently a lack of evidence to support this approach. Taking a realist approach, a review and concept-mapping exercise of ABCD approaches to improve health were conducted with a view to providing a better understanding about these approaches, how they work, and who they work for. Totally, 29 papers were deemed relevant and included in the review. The realist synthesis and concept mapping helped to identify concepts most commonly associated with ABCD but found no papers focused on long-term conditions (LTCs) and thus no evidence that this approach improves health outcomes for people with LTCs. While there is a lack of clarity about how to implement ABCD or how to evaluate it, this article offers a clearer theoretical framework about the essential ingredients needed to activate ABCD.