38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The impact of a lay counselor led collaborative care intervention for common mental disorders in public and private primary care: A qualitative evaluation nested in the MANAS trial in Goa, India

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The MANAS trial evaluated the effectiveness of a lay counselor led collaborative stepped care intervention for Common Mental Disorders (CMD) in public and private sector primary care settings in Goa, India. This paper describes the qualitative findings of the experience of the intervention and its impact on health and psychosocial outcomes. Twenty four primary care facilities (12 public and private each) were randomized to provide either collaborative stepped care (CSC) or enhanced usual care (EUC) to adults who screen positive for CMDs. Participants were sampled purposively based on two criteria: gender and, in the CSC arm, adherence with the intervention. The qualitative study component involved two semi-structured interviews with participants of both arms ( N = 115); the first interview within 2 months of recruitment and the second 6–8 months after recruitment. Data were collected between September 2007 and November 2009. More participants in the CSC than EUC arm reported relief from symptoms and an improvement in social functioning and positive impact on work and activities of daily life. The CSC participants attributed their improvement both to medication received from the doctors and the strategies suggested by the lay Health Counselors (HC). However, two key differences were observed in the results for the two types of facilities. First, the CSC participants in the public sector clinics were more likely to consider the HCs to be an important component of providing care who served as a link between patient and the doctor, provided them skills on stress management and helped in adherence to medication. Second, in the private sector, doctors performed roles similar to those of the HCs and participants in both arms placed much faith in the doctor who acted as a confidante and was perceived to understand the participant's health and context intimately. Lay counselors working in a CSC model have a positive effect on symptomatic relief, social functioning and satisfaction with care in patients with CMD attending primary care clinics although the impact, compared with usual care, is greater in the public sector.

          Highlights

          • Qualitative evaluation of a lay counselor primary mental health care intervention.

          • The intervention led to improved patients' health and social outcomes.

          • Improvements were attributed to both counselling and medicines.

          • Differences were greater in the public compared with the private facilities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Methods for exploring implementation variation and local context within a cluster randomised community intervention trial.

          Insignificant or modest findings in intervention trials may be attributable to poorly designed or theorised interventions, poorly implemented interventions, or inadequate evaluation methods. The pre-existing context may also account for the effects observed. A combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is outlined that will permit the determination of how context level factors might modify intervention effectiveness, within a cluster randomised community intervention trial to promote the health of mothers with new babies. The methods include written and oral narratives, key informant interviews, impact logs, and inter-organisational network analyses. Context level factors, which may affect intervention uptake, success, and sustainability are the density of inter-organisational ties within communities at the start of the intervention, the centrality of the primary care agencies expected to take a lead with the intervention, the extent of context-level adaptation of the intervention, and the amount of local resources contributed by the participating agencies. Investigation of how intervention effects are modified by context is a new methodological frontier in community intervention trial research.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Lay health worker led intervention for depressive and anxiety disorders in India: impact on clinical and disability outcomes over 12 months

            This paper has been corrected post-publication in deviation from print and in accordance with a correction printed in the February 2012 issue of the Journal. Background Depressive and anxiety disorders (common mental disorders) are the most common psychiatric condition encountered in primary healthcare. Aims To test the effectiveness of an intervention led by lay health counsellors in primary care settings (the MANAS intervention) to improve the outcomes of people with common mental disorders. Method Twenty-four primary care facilities (12 public, 12 private) in Goa (India) were randomised to provide either collaborative stepped care or enhanced usual care to adults who screened positive for common mental disorders. Participants were assessed at 2, 6 and 12 months for presence of ICD-10 common mental disorders, the severity of symptoms of depression and anxiety, suicidal behaviour and disability levels. All analyses were intention to treat and carried out separately for private and public facilities and adjusted for the design. The trial has been registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00446407). Results A total of 2796 participants were recruited. In public facilities, the intervention was consistently associated with strong beneficial effects over the 12 months on all outcomes. There was a 30% decrease in the prevalence of common mental disorders among those with baseline ICD-10 diagnoses (risk ratio (RR) = 0.70, 95% CI 0.53–0.92); and a similar effect among the subgroup of participants with depression (RR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.59–0.98). Suicide attempts/plans showed a 36% reduction over 12 months (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.42–0.98) among baseline ICD-10 cases. Strong effects were observed on days out of work and psychological morbidity, and modest effects on overall disability. In contrast, there was little evidence of impact of the intervention on any outcome among participants attending private facilities. Conclusions Trained lay counsellors working within a collaborative-care model can reduce prevalence of common mental disorders, suicidal behaviour, psychological morbidity and disability days among those attending public primary care facilities.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Still too little qualitative research to shed light on results from reviews of effectiveness trials: A case study of a Cochrane review on the use of lay health workers

              Background Qualitative research is used increasingly alongside trials of complex interventions to explore processes, contextual factors, or intervention characteristics that may have influenced trial outcomes. Qualitative research conducted alongside trials can also be used to shed light on the results of systematic reviews of effectiveness by looking for factors that can help explain heterogeneous results across trials. In a Cochrane review on the effects of using lay health workers on maternal and child health and infectious disease control, we identified 82 trials. These trials showed promising benefits but results were heterogeneous. Objective To use qualitative studies conducted alongside these trials to explore factors and processes that might have influenced intervention outcomes. Methods We attempted to identify qualitative research carried out alongside the trials by contacting trial authors, checking papers for references to qualitative research, searching Pubmed for related studies, and carrying out citation searches. For those qualitative studies that we included, we extracted information regarding study objective, data collection and analysis methods, and key themes and categories. Results For 52 (63%) of the trials, we found no qualitative research that had been conducted alongside the trials. For 16 (20%) trials, some form of qualitative data collection had been done but was unavailable or had been done before the trial. For 14 (17%) trials, qualitative research had been done during or shortly after the trial, although descriptions of qualitative methods and results were often sparse. Most of these 14 studies aimed to elicit trial participants' perspectives and experiences of the intervention. A common theme was participants' appreciation of the lay health workers' shared circumstances, for instance with regard to social background or experience of the health condition. In six studies, researchers explored the experiences of the lay health workers themselves. Issues included the importance of regular supervision and health professionals' support or lack of support. Conclusions Qualitative studies carried out alongside trials of complex interventions could offer opportunities to authors of systematic reviews of effectiveness wishing to understand the heterogeneity of trial results. For interventions of lay health worker programmes at least, too few such studies exist at present for these opportunities to be realised.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Soc Sci Med
                Soc Sci Med
                Social Science & Medicine (1982)
                Pergamon
                0277-9536
                1873-5347
                1 July 2013
                July 2013
                : 88
                : 100
                : 48-55
                Affiliations
                [1]Sangath, Goa, India
                [2]London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
                [3]Centre for Global Mental Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
                [4]Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene &Tropical Medicine, London, UK
                [5]Center for Mental Health, Public Health Foundation of India, India
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Sangath Centre, 841/1 Alto Porvorim, Goa 403521, India. Tel.: +91 9822132038. vikram.patel@ 123456lshtm.ac.uk
                Article
                SSM8916
                10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.04.002
                3675686
                23702209
                03ddd7c6-25e0-4db0-8bfd-9fb360f8ef2f
                © 2013 The Authors

                This document may be redistributed and reused, subject to certain conditions.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Health & Social care
                india,depression,anxiety,qualitative,lay health workers,randomized controlled trial,primary care

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log
                scite_

                Similar content4

                Cited by17

                Most referenced authors269