Search

The study's objective was to determine the effectiveness of a task-sharing psychological treatment for perinatal depression using non-specialist community health workers. A double-blind individual randomised controlled trial was conducted in two antenatal clinics in the peri-urban settlement of Khayelitsha, Cape Town. Adult pregnant women who scored 13 or above on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression rating Scale (EPDS) were randomised into the intervention arm (structured six-session psychological treatment) or the control arm (routine antenatal health care and three monthly phone calls). The primary outcome was response on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) at three months postpartum (minimum 40% score reduction from baseline) among participants who did not experience pregnancy or infant loss (modified intention-to-treat population) (registered on Clinical Trials: NCT01977326). Of 2187 eligible women approached, 425 (19.4%) screened positive on the EPDS and were randomised; 384 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (control: n = 200; intervention: n = 184). There were no significant differences in response on the HDRS at three months postpartum between the intervention and control arm. A task-sharing psychological treatment was not effective in treating depression among women living in Khayelitsha, South Africa. The findings give cause for reflection on the strategy of task-sharing in low-resource settings., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Perinatal depression is common in low and middle income countries (LAMICs). Task sharing interventions have been implemented to treat perinatal depression in these settings, as a way of dealing with staff shortages. Task sharing allows lay health workers to provide services for less complex cases while being trained and supervised by specialists. Randomized controlled trials suggest that these interventions can be effective but there is limited qualitative information exploring barriers and facilitators to their implementation. This systematic review aims to systematically review current qualitative evidence of process evaluations of task sharing interventions for perinatal depression in LAMICs in relation to the United Kingdom (UK) Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for conducting process evaluations., Methods: We searched Medline/ PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of science for studies from LAMICS using search terms under the broad categories of: (a) "maternal depression'" (b) "intervention" (c) "lay counsellor" OR "community health worker" OR "non-specialist" and (d) "LAMICs". Abstracts were independently reviewed for inclusion by two authors. Full text articles were screened and data for included articles were extracted using a standard data extraction sheet. Qualitative synthesis of qualitative evidence was conducted., Results: 8420 articles were identified from initial searches. Of these, 26 full text articles were screened for eligibility with only three studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Main findings revealed that participants identified the following crucial factors: contextual factors included physical location, accessibility and cultural norms. Implementation factors included acceptability of the intervention and characteristics of the personnel. Mechanisms included counsellor factors such as motivating and facilitating trust; intervention factors such as use of stories and visual aids, and understandability of the content; and participant factors such as shared experience, meeting learning needs, and meeting expectations., Conclusions: While task sharing has been suggested as an effective way of filling the treatment gap for perinatal depression, there is a paucity of qualitative research exploring barriers and facilitators to implementing these interventions. Qualitative process evaluations are crucial for the development of culturally relevant interventions.

Background: Task sharing of psycho-social interventions for perinatal depression has been shown to be feasible, acceptable and effective in low and middle-income countries. This study conducted a process evaluation exploring the perceptions of counsellors who delivered a task shared psycho-social counselling intervention for perinatal depression in Khayelitsha, Cape Town together with independent fidelity ratings., Methods: Post intervention qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with six counsellors from the AFrica Focus on Intervention Research for Mental health (AFFIRM-SA) randomised controlled trial on their perceptions of delivering a task shared psycho-social intervention for perinatal depression. Themes were identified using the framework approach and were coded and analysed using Nvivo v11. These interviews were supplemented with fidelity ratings for each counsellor and supervision notes., Results: Facilitating factors in the delivery of the intervention included intervention related factors such as: the content of the intervention, ongoing training and supervision, using a counselling manual, conducting counselling sessions in the local language (isiXhosa) and fidelity to the manual; counsellor factors included counsellors' confidence and motivation to conduct the sessions; participant factors included older age, commitment and a desire to be helped. Barriers included contextual factors such as poverty, crime and lack of space to conduct counselling sessions and participant factors such as the nature of the participant's problem, young age, and avoidance of contact with counsellors. Fidelity ratings and dropout rates varied substantially between counsellors., Conclusion: These findings show that a variety of intervention, counsellor, participant and contextual factors need to be considered in the delivery of task sharing counselling interventions. Careful attention needs to be paid to ongoing supervision and quality of care if lay counsellors are to deliver good quality task shared counselling interventions in under-resourced communities., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials: NCT01977326 , registered on 24/10/2013; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry: PACTR201403000676264 , registered on 11/10/2013.