Mary De Silva

Social capital and mental illness: a systematic review

Study objective: The concept of social capital has influenced mental health policies of nations and international organisations despite its limited evidence base. This papers aims to systematically review quantitative studies examining the association between social capital and mental illness. Design and setting: Twenty electronic databases and the reference sections of papers were searched to identify published studies. Authors of papers were contacted for unpublished work. Anonymised papers were reviewed by the authors of this paper. Papers with a validated mental illness outcome and an exposure variable agreed as measuring social capital were included. No limitations were put on date or language of publication. Main results: Twenty one studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. Fourteen measured social capital at the individual level and seven at an ecological level. The former offered evidence for an inverse relation between cognitive social capital and common mental disorders. There was moderate evidence for an inverse relation between cognitive social capital and child mental illness, and combined measures of social capital and common mental disorders. The seven ecological studies were diverse in methodology, populations investigated, and mental illness outcomes, making them difficult to summarise. Conclusions: Individual and ecological social capital may measure different aspects of the social environment. Current evidence is inadequate to inform the development of specific social capital interventions to combat mental illness.

Treatment and prevention of mental disorders in low-income and middle-income countries

We review the evidence on effectiveness of interventions for the treatment and prevention of selected mental disorders in low-income and middle-income countries. Depression can be treated effectively in such countries with low-cost antidepressants or with psychological interventions (such as cognitive-behaviour therapy and interpersonal therapies). Stepped-care and collaborative models provide a framework for integration of drug and psychological treatments and help to improve rates of adherence to treatment. First-generation antipsychotic drugs are effective and cost effective for the treatment of schizophrenia; their benefits can be enhanced by psychosocial treatments, such as community-based models of care. Brief interventions delivered by primary-care professionals are effective for management of hazardous alcohol use, and pharmacological and psychosocial interventions have some benefits for people with alcohol dependence. Policies designed to reduce consumption, such as increased taxes and other control strategies, can reduce the population burden of alcohol abuse. Evidence about the efficacy of interventions for developmental disabilities is inadequate, but community-based rehabilitation models provide a low-cost, integrative framework for care of children and adults with chronic mental disabilities. Evidence for mental health interventions for people who are exposed to conflict and other disasters is still weak-especially for interventions in the midst of emergencies. Some trials of interventions for prevention of depression and developmental delays in low-income and middle-income countries show beneficial effects. Interventions for depression, delivered in primary care, are as cost effective as antiretroviral drugs for HIV/AIDS. The process and effectiveness of scaling up mental health interventions has not been adequately assessed. Such research is needed to inform the continuing process of service reform and innovation. However, we recommend that policymakers should act on the available evidence to scale up effective and cost-effective treatments and preventive interventions for mental disorders.

Poverty and mental disorders: breaking the cycle in low-income and middle-income countries

Growing international evidence shows that mental ill health and poverty interact in a negative cycle in low-income and middle-income countries. However, little is known about the interventions that are needed to break this cycle. We undertook two systematic reviews to assess the effect of financial poverty alleviation interventions on mental, neurological, and substance misuse disorders and the effect of mental health interventions on individual and family or carer economic status in countries with low and middle incomes. We found that the mental health effect of poverty alleviation interventions was inconclusive, although some conditional cash transfer and asset promotion programmes had mental health benefits. By contrast, mental health interventions were associated with improved economic outcomes in all studies, although the difference was not statistically significant in every study. We recommend several areas for future research, including undertaking of high-quality intervention studies in low-income and middle-income countries, assessment of the macroeconomic consequences of scaling up of mental health care, and assessment of the effect of redistribution and market failures in mental health. This study supports the call to scale up mental health care, not only as a public health and human rights priority, but also as a development priority.

Effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors for depressive and anxiety disorders in primary care in Goa, India (MANAS): a cluster randomised controlled trial.

: Depression and anxiety disorders are common mental disorders worldwide. The MANAS trial aimed to test the effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors in primary care settings to improve outcomes of people with these disorders. : In this cluster randomised trial, primary care facilities in Goa, India, were assigned (1:1) by computer-generated randomised sequence to intervention or control (enhanced usual care) groups. All adults who screened positive for common mental disorders were eligible. The collaborative stepped-care intervention offered case management and psychosocial interventions, provided by a trained lay health counsellor, supplemented by antidepressant drugs by the primary care physician and supervision by a mental health specialist. The research assessor was masked. The primary outcome was recovery from common mental disorders as defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10th revision (ICD-10) at 6 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446407. : 24 study clusters, with an equal proportion of public and private facilities, were randomised equally between groups. 1160 of 1360 (85%) patients in the intervention group and 1269 of 1436 (88%) in the control group completed the outcome assessment. Patients with ICD-10-confirmed common mental disorders in the intervention group were more likely to have recovered at 6 months than were those in the control group (n=620 [65·0%] vs 553 [52·9%]; risk ratio 1·22, 95% CI 1·00-1·47; risk difference=12·1%, 95% CI 1·6%-22·5%). The intervention had strong evidence of an effect in public facility attenders (369 [65·9%] vs 267 [42·5%], risk ratio 1·55, 95% CI 1·02-2·35) but no evidence for an effect in private facility attenders (251 [64·1%] vs 286 [65·9%], risk ratio 0·95, 0·74-1·22). There were three deaths and four suicide attempts in the collaborative stepped-care group and six deaths and six suicide attempts in the enhanced usual care group. None of the deaths were from suicide. : A trained lay counsellor-led collaborative care intervention can lead to an improvement in recovery from CMD among patients attending public primary care facilities. : The Wellcome Trust.BACKGROUND Depression and anxiety disorders are common mental disorders worldwide. The MANAS trial aimed to test the effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors in primary care settings to improve outcomes of people with these disorders. METHODS In this cluster randomised trial, primary care facilities in Goa, India, were assigned (1:1) by computer-generated randomised sequence to intervention or control (enhanced usual care) groups. All adults who screened positive for common mental disorders were eligible. The collaborative stepped-care intervention offered case management and psychosocial interventions, provided by a trained lay health counsellor, supplemented by antidepressant drugs by the primary care physician and supervision by a mental health specialist. The research assessor was masked. The primary outcome was recovery from common mental disorders as defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10th revision (ICD-10) at 6 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446407. FINDINGS 24 study clusters, with an equal proportion of public and private facilities, were randomised equally between groups. 1160 of 1360 (85%) patients in the intervention group and 1269 of 1436 (88%) in the control group completed the outcome assessment. Patients with ICD-10-confirmed common mental disorders in the intervention group were more likely to have recovered at 6 months than were those in the control group (n=620 [65·0%] vs 553 [52·9%]; risk ratio 1·22, 95% CI 1·00-1·47; risk difference=12·1%, 95% CI 1·6%-22·5%). The intervention had strong evidence of an effect in public facility attenders (369 [65·9%] vs 267 [42·5%], risk ratio 1·55, 95% CI 1·02-2·35) but no evidence for an effect in private facility attenders (251 [64·1%] vs 286 [65·9%], risk ratio 0·95, 0·74-1·22). There were three deaths and four suicide attempts in the collaborative stepped-care group and six deaths and six suicide attempts in the enhanced usual care group. None of the deaths were from suicide. INTERPRETATION A trained lay counsellor-led collaborative care intervention can lead to an improvement in recovery from CMD among patients attending public primary care facilities. FUNDING The Wellcome Trust.

PRIME: A Programme to Reduce the Treatment Gap for Mental Disorders in Five Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Crick Lund and colleagues describe their plans for the PRogramme for Improving Mental health carE (PRIME), which aims to generate evidence on implementing and scaling up integrated packages of care for priority mental disorders in primary and maternal health care contexts in Ethiopia, India, Nepal, South Africa, and Uganda.

Maternal mental health and child nutritional status in four developing countries

Objective: To test the hypothesis that maternal common mental disorders (CMD) are associated with poorer child nutritional status in four developing countries (Ethiopia, India, Vietnam, and Peru). Design: Community based cross sectional survey in 20 sites in each of the four countries. Maternal CMD measured by the self reporting questionnaire 20 items (SRQ20). Potential confounding factors include: household poverty, household composition, maternal characteristics such as age and education, child characteristics such as birth weight, age, and sex. Possible mediating factors included the child’s physical health and breast feeding status. Setting: Urban and rural, poor and middle income areas in each country. Participants: 2000 mothers and their children aged 6–18 months in each country. Main outcome measures: Child stunting and underweight measured using standard anthropometric techniques. Results: Levels of maternal CMD and child malnutrition are high in each study setting. After adjusting for confounding factors, the odds ratios (OR) for the association of maternal CMD with child stunting are: India 1.4 (95%CI 1.2 to 1.6), Peru 1.1 (0.9 to 1.4), Vietnam 1.3 (0.9 to 1.7), and Ethiopia 0.9 (0.7 to 1.2). For child underweight, the confounder adjusted ORs are: India 1.1 (0.9 to 1.4), Peru 0.9 (0.6 to 1.2), Vietnam 1.4 (1.1 to 1.8), and Ethiopia 1.1 (0.9 to 1.4). No clear evidence for effect modification by the child’s age or sex was found. Possible mediating factors for the effect of maternal CMD on child malnutrition did not provide strong suggestions for potential mechanisms. Conclusions: There was a relation between high maternal CMD and poor child nutritional status in India and Vietnam. However, the findings from Peru and Ethiopia do not provide clear evidence for a similar association being present in non-Asian countries. Regardless of the direction of the relation, child nutrition programmes in Asia should consider incorporating promotion of maternal mental health.

Patient outcome after traumatic brain injury in high-, middle- and low-income countries: analysis of data on 8927 patients in 46 countries

BACKGROUND Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide. The burden of TBI is greatest in low- and middle-income countries (LAMIC), yet little is known about patient outcomes in these settings. METHODS Complete data on 8927 patients from 46 countries from the corticosteroid randomization after significant head injury (CRASH) trial were analysed to explore whether outcomes 6 months after TBI differed between high-income countries and LAMIC. RESULTS Just under half of patients experienced a good recovery, one-third moderate or severe disability and one-quarter died within 6 months of their injury. Univariate analyses showed that patients in LAMIC were more likely to die following severe TBI, but were less likely to be disabled following mild and moderate TBI. These results were confirmed in multivariate analyses. Compared to patients in high-income countries, patients in LAMIC have over twice the odds of dying following severe TBI (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.51-3.30) but half the odds of disability following mild (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.72) and moderate TBI (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35-0.81). There were no differences between settings in the odds of death following either mild or moderate TBI. CONCLUSIONS Reduced death rates following severe TBI in patients from high-income countries may be due to differences in medical care which may result in a higher proportion of patients surviving with a disability. Socio-cultural factors may explain the lower levels of disability after mild and moderate TBI in LAMIC.

Challenges and Opportunities for Implementing Integrated Mental Health Care: A District Level Situation Analysis from Five Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Background Little is known about how to tailor implementation of mental health services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to the diverse settings encountered within and between countries. In this paper we compare the baseline context, challenges and opportunities in districts in five LMICs (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, South Africa and Uganda) participating in the PRogramme for Improving Mental health carE (PRIME). The purpose was to inform development and implementation of a comprehensive district plan to integrate mental health into primary care. Methods A situation analysis tool was developed for the study, drawing on existing tools and expert consensus. Cross-sectional information obtained was largely in the public domain in all five districts. Results The PRIME study districts face substantial contextual and health system challenges many of which are common across sites. Reliable information on existing treatment coverage for mental disorders was unavailable. Particularly in the low-income countries, many health service organisational requirements for mental health care were absent, including specialist mental health professionals to support the service and reliable supplies of medication. Across all sites, community mental health literacy was low and there were no models of multi-sectoral working or collaborations with traditional or religious healers. Nonetheless health system opportunities were apparent. In each district there was potential to apply existing models of care for tuberculosis and HIV or non-communicable disorders, which have established mechanisms for detection of drop-out from care, outreach and adherence support. The extensive networks of community-based health workers and volunteers in most districts provide further opportunities to expand mental health care. Conclusions The low level of baseline health system preparedness across sites underlines that interventions at the levels of health care organisation, health facility and community will all be essential for sustainable delivery of quality mental health care integrated into primary care.

Reducing the treatment gap for mental disorders: a WPA survey

The treatment gap for people with mental disorders exceeds 50% in all countries of the world, approaching astonishingly high rates of 90% in the least resourced countries. We report the findings of the first systematic survey of leaders of psychiatry in nearly 60 countries on the strategies for reducing the treatment gap. We sought to elicit the views of these representatives on the roles of different human resources and health care settings in delivering care and on the importance of a range of strategies to increase the coverage of evidence-based treatments for priority mental disorders for each demographic stage (childhood, adolescence, adulthood and old age). Our findings clearly indicate three strategies for reducing the treatment gap: increasing the numbers of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals; increasing the involvement of a range of appropriately trained non-specialist providers; and the active involvement of people affected by mental disorders. This is true for both high income and low/middle income countries, though relatively of more importance in the latter. We view this survey as a critically important first step in ascertaining the position of psychiatrists, one of the most influential stakeholder communities in global mental health, in addressing the global challenge of scaling up mental health services to reduce the treatment gap.

Theory of Change: a theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council's framework for complex interventions

BackgroundThe Medical Research Councils’ framework for complex interventions has been criticized for not including theory-driven approaches to evaluation. Although the framework does include broad guidance on the use of theory, it contains little practical guidance for implementers and there have been calls to develop a more comprehensive approach. A prospective, theory-driven process of intervention design and evaluation is required to develop complex healthcare interventions which are more likely to be effective, sustainable and scalable.MethodsWe propose a theory-driven approach to the design and evaluation of complex interventions by adapting and integrating a programmatic design and evaluation tool, Theory of Change (ToC), into the MRC framework for complex interventions. We provide a guide to what ToC is, how to construct one, and how to integrate its use into research projects seeking to design, implement and evaluate complex interventions using the MRC framework. We test this approach by using ToC within two randomized controlled trials and one non-randomized evaluation of complex interventions.ResultsOur application of ToC in three research projects has shown that ToC can strengthen key stages of the MRC framework. It can aid the development of interventions by providing a framework for enhanced stakeholder engagement and by explicitly designing an intervention that is embedded in the local context. For the feasibility and piloting stage, ToC enables the systematic identification of knowledge gaps to generate research questions that strengthen intervention design. ToC may improve the evaluation of interventions by providing a comprehensive set of indicators to evaluate all stages of the causal pathway through which an intervention achieves impact, combining evaluations of intervention effectiveness with detailed process evaluations into one theoretical framework.ConclusionsIncorporating a ToC approach into the MRC framework holds promise for improving the design and evaluation of complex interventions, thereby increasing the likelihood that the intervention will be ultimately effective, sustainable and scalable. We urge researchers developing and evaluating complex interventions to consider using this approach, to evaluate its usefulness and to build an evidence base to further refine the methodology.Trial registrationClinical trials.gov: NCT02160249