Literature Collection

BACKGROUND: For a decade, experts have suggested integrating mental health care into primary care to help bridge mental health Treatment Gap. General Practitioners (GPs) are the first port-of-call for many patients with mental ill-health. In Indonesia, the WHO mhGAP is being systematically introduced to its network of 10,000 primary care clinics as an add-on mental health training for pairs of GPs and Nurses, since the end of 2015. In one of 34 provinces, there exists an integrated care model: the co-location of clinical psychologists in primary care clinics. This trial evaluates patient outcomes among those provided mental health care by GPs with those treated by clinical psychologists in primary care. METHODS: In this partially-randomised, pragmatic, two-arm cluster non-inferiority trial, 14 primary care clinics were assigned to receive the WHO mhGAP training and 14 clinics with the co-location framework were assigned to the Specialist arm. Participants (patients) were blinded to the existence of the other pathway, and outcome assessors were blinded to group assignment. All adult primary care patients who screened positive for psychiatric morbidity were eligible. GPs offered psychosocial and/or pharmacological interventions and Clinical Psychologists offered psychosocial interventions. The primary outcome was health and social functioning as measured by the HoNOS and secondary outcomes include disability measured by WHODAS 2.0, health-related quality of life measured by EQ-5D-3L, and resource use and costs evaluated from a health services perspective, at six months. RESULTS: 153 patients completed the outcome assessment following GP care alongside 141 patients following Clinical Psychologists care. Outcomes of GP care were proven to be statistically not inferior to Clinical Psychologists in reducing symptoms of social and physical impairment, reducing disability, and improving health-related quality of life at six months. Economic analyses indicate lower costs and better outcomes in the Specialist arm and suggest a 50% probability of WHO mhGAP framework being cost-effective at the Indonesian willingness to pay threshold per QALY. CONCLUSION: General Practitioners supported by nurses in primary care clinics could effectively manage mild to moderate mental health issues commonly found among primary care patients. They provide non-stigmatising mental health care within community context, helping to reduce the mental health Treatment Gap. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02700490.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a public health crisis and is challenging to treat. Previous research has shown correlations between OUD, abuse/trauma, and chronic pain. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to investigate history of lifetime sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse among participants in a medication-assisted treatment (MAT) program for OUD, and to investigate associations between abuse history and chronic pain. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of intake data from a 2-year, nonexperimental cohort treatment program of patients with OUD in rural Colorado. De-identified data were provided by 476 adult MAT patients using the Adult Addiction Severity Index (ASI-6). The ASI-6 includes three yes/no questions about history of abuse (emotional, physical, and sexual), with separate scoring for "past 30 days" and "lifetime" abuse. RESULTS: Lifetime history among MAT program for OUD patients was 23% for sexual abuse, 43% for physical abuse, and 58% for emotional abuse. History of physical abuse was significantly associated with having a chronic pain diagnosis, χ(2) = 4.49, p = .03, and also with higher reported pain levels, t(460) = 2.71, p = .007. CONCLUSION: Lifetime history of physical abuse was associated with OUD and chronic pain, yet standard pain assessments do not assess these factors. In health care settings, the implementation of standardized trauma-informed screening tools, prompt recognition of abuse/trauma history, and adjunct psychological interventions may reduce stigma, reduce opioid use escalation, and help patients overcome OUD.

Pregnant and parenting women with opioid use disorder face multiple challenges to recovery. Trauma histories, poverty, stigma and discrimination, and lack of access to treatment intersect to marginalise this population. It is important that pregnant and parenting women with opioid use disorder receive comprehensive care to improve their health, the health of their child(ren), and prevent the intergenerational transmission of opioid and other substance use disorders. For nearly 50 years the Maternal Addiction Treatment, Education, and Research program has provided an evolving and expanding range of comprehensive services for treating opioid and other substance use disorders in this population. In this review the rationale for, and processes by which, key components of a comprehensive approach are discussed. These components include patient navigation for access to care, low-barrier medications for opioid use disorder, effective trauma-responsive therapy, prenatal and well-child healthcare, and other support services that make it possible for pregnant and parenting women to engage in treatment and improve the health of the entire family. Additionally, a method for supporting staff to build resilience and reduce fatigue and burnout is discussed. These components comprise an effective model of care for pregnant and parenting women with opioid and other substance use disorders.

Background: Major efforts are underway to improve access to mental health care in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) including systematic training of non-specialized health professionals and other care providers to identify and help individuals with mental disorders. In many LMIC, this effort is guided by the mental health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) established by the World Health Organization, and commonly centres around one tool in this program: the mhGAP-Intervention Guide. Objective: To identify cultural and contextual challenges in mhGAP training and implementation and potential strategies for mitigation. Method: An informal consultative approach was used to analyze the authors' combined field experience in the practice of mhGAP implementation and training. We employed iterative thematic analysis to consolidate and refine lessons, challenges and recommendations through multiple drafts. Findings were organized into categories according to specific challenges, lessons learned and recommendations for future practice. We aimed to identify cross-cutting and recurrent issues. Results: Based on intensive fieldwork experience with a focus on capacity building, we identify six major sets of challenges: (i) cultural differences in explanations of and attitudes toward mental disorder; (ii) the structure of the local health-care system; (iii) the level of supervision and support available post-training; (iv) the level of previous education, knowledge and skills of trainees; (v) the process of recruitment of trainees; and (vi) the larger socio-political context. Approaches to addressing these problems include: (1) cultural and contextual adaptation of training activities, (2) meaningful stakeholder and community engagement, and (3) processes that provide support to trainees, such as ongoing supervision and Communities of Practice. Conclusion: Contextual and cultural factors present major barriers to mhGAP implementation and sustainability of improved services. To enable trainees to effectively apply their local cultural knowledge, mhGAP training needs to: (1) address assumptions, biases and stigma associated with mental health symptoms and problems; (2) provide an explicit framework to guide the integration of cultural knowledge into assessment, treatment negotiation, and delivery; and (3) address the specific kinds of problems, modes of clinical presentations and social predicaments seen in the local population. Continued research is needed to assess the effectiveness these strategies.

BACKGROUND: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is an evidence-based approach that reduces opioid-related mortality, particularly among criminal legal-involved persons who are at increased risk of adverse outcomes related to OUD. Implementing evidence-based approaches in the context of probation settings requires an in-depth understanding of specific contexts to improve intervention efficacy and effectiveness. Here, we use the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework to understand implementation contexts for MOUD provision in the probation setting. METHODS: In-depth individual interviews were conducted with key programmatic stakeholders (treatment providers and probation staff involved in service provision for people on probation). The study examined stakeholder perspectives regarding MOUD and Peer Support Service (PSS) implementation among people who are involved in community supervision. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis was conducted, and subsequently the codes, subcodes, and themes were mapped onto the EPIS framework to better understand implementation contexts. RESULTS: We deduced key inner, outer, and bridging contexts that shape treatment service provision for individuals with OUD who are on probation. Inner contexts include a strong organizational climate that supports MOUD implementation and enthusiasm for peer support services. Outer contexts include difficulty navigating insurance among providers, treatment costs, and systemic stigma towards MOUD. Bridging contexts include a lack of collaboration/communication between relevant agencies (e.g., probation and courts). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate the implementation is complex and requires a coordinated effort between correctional systems, probation agencies, and community-based treatment providers.

BACKGROUND: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is an evidence-based approach that reduces opioid-related mortality, particularly among criminal legal-involved persons who are at increased risk of adverse outcomes related to OUD. Implementing evidence-based approaches in the context of probation settings requires an in-depth understanding of specific contexts to improve intervention efficacy and effectiveness. Here, we use the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework to understand implementation contexts for MOUD provision to the probation setting. METHODS: In-depth individual interviews were conducted with key programmatic stakeholders (treatment providers and probation staff involved in service provision for people on probation). The study examined stakeholder perspectives regarding MOUD and Peer Support Service (PSS) implementation among people who are involved in community supervision. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis was conducted, and subsequently the codes, subcodes, and themes were mapped onto the EPIS framework to better understand implementation contexts. RESULTS: We deduced key inner, outer, and bridging contexts that shape treatment service provision for individuals with OUD who are on probation. Inner contexts include a strong organizational climate that supports MOUD implementation and enthusiasm for peer support services. Outer contexts include difficulty navigating insurance among providers, treatment costs, and systemic stigma towards MOUD. Bridging contexts include a lack of collaboration/communication between relevant agencies (e.g., probation and courts). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate the implementation is complex and requires a coordinated effort between correctional systems, probation agencies, and community-based treatment providers.