Search

Aim.In low-income African countries, ensuring food security for all segments of the population is a high priority. Mental illness is associated consistently with poverty, but there is little evidence regarding the association with food insecurity. The aim of this study was to compare the levels of food insecurity in people with severe mental disorders (SMD) with the general population in a rural African setting with a high burden of food insecurity.Method.Households of 292 community-ascertained people with a specialist-confirmed diagnosis of SMD (including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder) were compared with 284 households without a person with SMD in a rural district in south Ethiopia. At the time of the study, no mental health services were available within the district. Food insecurity was measured using a validated version of the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale. Disability was measured using the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0.Result.Severe household food insecurity was reported by 32.5% of people with SMD and 15.9% of respondents from comparison households: adjusted odds ratio 2.82 (95% confidence interval 1.62 to 4.91). Higher annual income was associated independently with lower odds of severe food insecurity. When total disability scores were added into the model, the association between SMD and food insecurity became non-significant, indicating a possible mediating role of disability.Conclusion.Efforts to alleviate food insecurity need to target people with SMD as a vulnerable group. Addressing the disabling effects of SMD would also be expected to reduce food insecurity. Access to mental health care integrated into primary care is being expanded in this district as part of the Programme for Improving Mental health carE (PRIME). The impact of treatment on disability and food insecurity will be evaluated.

Efforts to support the scale-up of integrated mental health care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) need to focus on building human resource capacity in health system strengthening, as well as in the direct provision of mental health care. In a companion editorial, we describe a range of capacity-building activities that are being implemented by a multi-country research consortium (Emerald: Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries) for (1) service users and caregivers, (2) service planners and policy-makers and (3) researchers in six LMICs (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda). In this paper, we focus on the methodology being used to evaluate the impact of capacity-building in these three target groups. We first review the evidence base for approaches to evaluation of capacity-building, highlighting the gaps in this area. We then describe the adaptation of best practice for the Emerald capacity-building evaluation. The resulting mixed method evaluation framework was tailored to each target group and to each country context. We identified a need to expand the evidence base on indicators of successful capacity-building across the different target groups. To address this, we developed an evaluation plan to measure the adequacy and usefulness of quantitative capacity-building indicators when compared with qualitative evaluation. We argue that evaluation needs to be an integral part of capacity-building activities and that expertise needs to be built in methods of evaluation. The Emerald evaluation provides a potential model for capacity-building evaluation across key stakeholder groups and promises to extend understanding of useful indicators of success.

Aims.The aims of this paper are to: (i) explore the experiences of involvement of mental health service users, their caregivers, mental health centre heads and policy makers in mental health system strengthening in three low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Ethiopia, Nepal and Nigeria); (ii) analyse the potential benefits and barriers of such involvement; and (iii) identify strategies required to achieve greater service user and caregiver participation.Methods.A cross-country qualitative study was conducted, interviewing 83 stakeholders of mental health services.Results.Our analysis showed that service user and caregiver involvement in the health system strengthening process was an alien concept for most participants. They reported very limited access to direct participation. Stigma and poverty were described as the main barriers for involvement. Several strategies were identified by participants to overcome existing hurdles to facilitate service user and caregiver involvement in the mental health system strengthening process, such as support to access treatment, mental health promotion and empowerment of service users. This study suggests that capacity building for service users, and strengthening of user groups would equip them to contribute meaningfully to policy development from informed perspectives.Conclusion.Involvement of service users and their caregivers in mental health decision-making is still in its infancy in LMICs. Effective strategies are required to overcome existing barriers, for example making funding more widely available for Ph.D. studies in participatory research with service users and caregivers to develop, implement and evaluate approaches to involvement that are locally and culturally acceptable in LMICs.

There is increasing international recognition of the need to build capacity to strengthen mental health systems. This is a fundamental goal of the ‘Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries’ (Emerald) programme, which is being implemented in six low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda). This paper discusses Emerald's capacity-building approaches and outputs for three target groups in mental health system strengthening: (1) mental health service users and caregivers, (2) service planners and policy-makers, and (3) mental health researchers. When planning the capacity-building activities, the approach taken included a capabilities/skills matrix, needs assessments, a situational analysis, systematic reviews, qualitative interviews and stakeholder meetings, as well as the application of previous theory, evidence and experience. Each of the Emerald LMIC partners was found to have strengths in aspects of mental health system strengthening, which were complementary across the consortium. Furthermore, despite similarities across the countries, capacity-building interventions needed to be tailored to suit the specific needs of individual countries. The capacity-building outputs include three publicly and freely available short courses/workshops in mental health system strengthening for each of the target groups, 27 Masters-level modules (also open access), nine Emerald-linked PhD students, two MSc studentships, mentoring of post-doctoral/mid-level researchers, and ongoing collaboration and dialogue with the three groups. The approach taken by Emerald can provide a potential model for the development of capacity-building activities across the three target groups in LMICs.

The explicit inclusion of mental health within the Sustainable Development Goals is a welcome development, borne out of powerful advocacy using public health, economic and human rights arguments. As funding comes on line for scale-up of evidence-based mental health care by task-sharing with primary care, it is time to take stock about care for people affected by severe mental illness (SMI). The existing evidence base for task shared care for SMI provides an imperative to get started, but is skewed towards relatively more affluent and urban populations in middle-income countries where specialist mental health professionals provide most of the care. Randomised, controlled trials and rigorous implementation research on task shared service models are underway which will go some way to improving understanding of the quality, safety, effectiveness and acceptability of more widely generalisable care for people with SMI. A sub-group of people with SMI have more complex and long-term needs for care, with a high risk of homelessness, imprisonment and human rights violations as family and social supports become overwhelmed. Case studies from non-governmental organisations provide examples of holistic approaches to rehabilitation, recovery and empowerment of people with SMI, but rigorous comparative studies are needed to identify the most efficient, effective and scalable approaches to care. Health system constraints are emerging as the over-riding barriers to successful task-sharing, highlighting a need to develop and evaluate chronic care models for people with SMI that succeed in reducing premature mortality, improving wellbeing and achieving better social outcomes. Addressing these evidence gaps is essential if task-sharing mental health care is going to deliver on its promise of promoting recovery for the full range of people affected by SMI.

Background.Although financing represents a critical component of health system strengthening and also a defining concern of efforts to move towards universal health coverage, many countries lack the tools and capacity to plan effectively for service scale-up. As part of a multi-country collaborative study (the Emerald project), we set out to develop, test and apply a fully integrated health systems resource planning and health impact tool for mental, neurological and substance use (MNS) disorders.Methods.A new module of the existing UN strategic planning OneHealth Tool was developed, which identifies health system resources required to scale-up a range of specified interventions for MNS disorders and also projects expected health gains at the population level. We conducted local capacity-building in its use, as well as stakeholder consultations, then tested and calibrated all model parameters, and applied the tool to three priority mental and neurological disorders (psychosis, depression and epilepsy) in six low- and middle-income countries.Results.Resource needs for scaling-up mental health services to reach desired coverage goals are substantial compared with the current allocation of resources in the six represented countries but are not large in absolute terms. In four of the Emerald study countries (Ethiopia, India, Nepal and Uganda), the cost of delivering key interventions for psychosis, depression and epilepsy at existing treatment coverage is estimated at US$ 0.06–0.33 per capita of total population per year (in Nigeria and South Africa it is US$ 1.36–1.92). By comparison, the projected cost per capita at target levels of coverage approaches US$ 5 per capita in Nigeria and South Africa, and ranges from US$ 0.14–1.27 in the other four countries. Implementation of such a package of care at target levels of coverage is expected to yield between 291 and 947 healthy life years per one million populations, which represents a substantial health gain for the currently neglected and underserved sub-populations suffering from psychosis, depression and epilepsy.Conclusions.This newly developed and validated module of OneHealth tool can be used, especially within the context of integrated health planning at the national level, to generate contextualised estimates of the resource needs, costs and health impacts of scaled-up mental health service delivery.

Aims.In low-income countries, care for people with severe mental disorders (SMDs) who manage to access treatment is usually emergency-based, intermittent or narrowly biomedical. The aim of this study was to inform development of a scalable district-level mental health care plan to meet the long-term care needs of people with SMD in rural Ethiopia.Methods.The present study was carried out as formative work for the Programme for Improving Mental health CarEwhich seeks to develop, implement and evaluate a district level model of integrating mental health care into primary care. Six focus group discussions and 25 in-depth interviews were conducted with service planners, primary care providers, traditional and religious healers, mental health service users, caregivers and community representatives. Framework analysis was used, with findings mapped onto the domains of the Innovative Care for Chronic Conditions (ICCC) framework.Results.Three main themes were identified. (1) Focused on ‘Restoring the person's life’, including the need for interventions to address basic needs for food, shelter and livelihoods, as well as spiritual recovery and reintegration into society. All respondents considered this to be important, but service users gave particular emphasis to this aspect of care. (2) Engaging with families, addressed the essential role of families, their need for practical and emotional support, and the importance of equipping families to provide a therapeutic environment. (3) Delivering collaborative, long-term care, focused on enhancing accessibility to biomedical mental health care, utilising community-based health workers and volunteers as an untapped resource to support adherence and engagement with services, learning from experience of service models for chronic communicable diseases (HIV and tuberculosis) and integrating the role of traditional and religious healers alongside biomedical care. Biomedical approaches were more strongly endorsed by health workers, with traditional healers, religious leaders and service users more inclined to see medication as but one component of care. The salience of poverty to service planning was cross-cutting.Conclusions.Stakeholders prioritised interventions to meet basic needs for survival and endorsed a multi-faceted approach to promoting recovery from SMD, including social recovery. However, sole reliance on this over-stretched community to mobilise the necessary resources may not be feasible. An adapted form of the ICCC framework appeared highly applicable to planning an acceptable, feasible and sustainable model of care.