Search

Background: Syrian refugees have a high burden of mental health symptoms and face challenges in accessing mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS). This study assesses health system responsiveness (HSR) to the MHPSS needs of Syrian refugees, comparing countries in Europe and the Middle East to inform recommendations for strengthening MHPSS systems. Methods: A mixed-methods rapid appraisal methodology guided by an adapted WHO Health System Framework was used to assess HSR in eight countries (Egypt, Germany, Jordan, Lebanon, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and Türkiye). Quantitative and qualitative analysis of primary and secondary data was used. Data collection and analysis were performed iteratively by multiple researchers. Country reports were used for comparative analysis and synthesis. Results: We found numerous constraints in HSR: i) Too few appropriate mental health providers and services; ii) Travel-related barriers impeding access to services, widening rural-urban inequalities in the distribution of mental health workers; iii) Cultural, language, and knowledge-related barriers to timely care likely caused by insufficient numbers of culturally sensitive providers, costs of professional interpreters, somatic presentations of distress by Syrian refugees, limited mental health awareness, and stigma associated to mental illness; iv) High out-of-pocket costs for psychological treatment and transportation to services reducing affordability, particularly in middle-income countries; v) Long waiting times for specialist mental health services; vi) Information gaps on the mental health needs of refugees and responsiveness of MHPSS systems in all countries. Six recommendations are provided. Conclusions: All eight host countries struggle to provide responsive MHPSS to Syrian refugees. Strengthening the mental health workforce (in terms of quantity, quality, diversity, and distribution) is urgently needed to enable Syrian refugees to receive culturally appropriate

Background: The mental health burden among refugees in high-income countries (HICs) is high, whereas access to mental healthcare can be limited. Objective: To examine the effectiveness of a peer-provided psychological intervention (Problem Management Plus; PM+) in reducing symptoms of common mental disorders (CMDs) among Syrian refugees in the Netherlands. Methods: We conducted a single-blind, randomised controlled trial among adult Syrian refugees recruited in March 2019-December 2021 (No. NTR7552). Individuals with psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) >15) and functional impairment (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) >16) were allocated to PM+ in addition to care as usual (PM+/CAU) or CAU only. Participants were reassessed at 1-week and 3-month follow-up. Primary outcome was depression/anxiety combined (Hopkins Symptom Checklist; HSCL-25) at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included depression (HSCL-25), anxiety (HSCL-25), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms (PTSD Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition; PCL-5), impairment (WHODAS 2.0) and self-identified problems (PSYCHLOPS; Psychological Outcomes Profiles). Primary analysis was intention-to-treat. Findings: Participants (n=206; mean age=37 years, 62% men) were randomised into PM+/CAU (n=103) or CAU (n=103). At 3-month follow-up, PM+/CAU had greater reductions on depression/anxiety relative to CAU (mean difference -0.25; 95% CI -0.385 to -0.122; p=0.0001, Cohen's d=0.41). PM+/CAU also showed greater reductions on depression (p=0.0002, Cohen's d=0.42), anxiety (p=0.001, Cohen's d=0.27), PTSD symptoms (p=0.0005, Cohen's d=0.39) and self-identified problems (p=0.03, Cohen's d=0.26), but not on impairment (p=0.084, Cohen's d=0.21). Conclusions: PM+ effectively reduces symptoms of CMDs among Syrian refugees. A strength was high retention at follow-up. Generalisability is limited by predominantly including refugees wit

Background: Higher social support protects people from developing mental disorders. Limited evidence is available on the mechanism through which social support plays this protective role. Objective: To investigate the stress-buffering process of social support on depressive symptoms using a novel longitudinal dynamic symptom network approach. Methods: A total of 4242 adult participants who completed the first two waves (from May to October 2020) of the International Covid Mental Health Survey were included in the study. Cross-lagged panel network modelling was used to estimate a longitudinal network of self-reported social support, loneliness and depressive symptoms. Standardised regression coefficients from regularised cross-lagged regressions were estimated as edge weights of the network. Findings: The results support a unidirectional protective effect of social support on key depressive symptoms, partly mediated through loneliness: A higher number of close confidants and accessible practical help was associated with decreased anhedonia (weight=-0.033) and negative self-appraisal symptoms (weight=-0.038). Support from others was also negatively associated with loneliness, which in turn associated with decreased depressed mood (weight=0.086) and negative self-appraisal (weight=0.077). We identified a greater number of direct relationships from social support to depressive symptoms among men compared with women. Also, the edge weights from social support to depression were generally stronger in the men's network. Conclusions: Reductions in negative self-appraisal might function as a bridge between social support and other depressive symptoms, and, thus, it may have amplified the protective effect of social support. Men appear to benefit more from social support than women. Clinical implications: Building community-based support networks to deliver practical support, and loneliness reduction components are critical for depression prevention interventions after stress

Backgrounds: individuals with chronic medical conditions are considered highly exposed to COVID-19 pandemic stress, but emerging evidence is demonstrating that resilience is common even among them. We aimed at identifying sustained resilient outcomes and their predictors in chronically ill people during the first year of the pandemic. Methods: this international 4-wave 1-year longitudinal online survey included items on socio-demographic characteristics, economic and living situation, lifestyle and habits, pandemic-related issues, and history of mental disorders. Adherence to and approval of imposed restrictions, trust in governments and in scientific community during the pandemic were also investigated. The following tools were administered: the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the PTSD Checklist DSM-5, the Oslo Social Support Scale, the Padua Inventory, and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. Results: one thousand fifty-two individuals reporting a chronic condition out of 8011 total participants from 13 countries were included in the study, and 965 had data available for the final model. The estimated probability of being "sustained-resilient" was 34%. Older male individuals, participants employed before and during the pandemic or with perceived social support were more likely to belong to the sustained-resilience group. Loneliness, a previous mental disorder, high hedonism, fear of COVID-19 contamination, concern for the health of loved ones, and non-approving pandemic restrictions were predictors of not-resilient outcomes in our sample. Conclusions: we found similarities and differences from established predictors of resilience and identified some new ones specific to pandemics. Further investigation is warranted and could inform the design of resilience-building interventions in people with chronic diseases., NA

Introduction The World Health Organization's (WHO) scalable psychological interventions, such as Problem Management Plus (PM+) and Step-by-Step (SbS) are designed to be cost-effective non-specialist delivered interventions to reduce symptoms of common mental disorders, such as anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The STRENGTHS consortium aims to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation of the individual format of PM+ and its group version (gPM+), as well as of the digital SbS intervention among Syrian refugees in seven countries in Europe and the Middle East. This is a study protocol for a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to evaluate (1) overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and (2) treatment moderators of PM+, gPM+ and SbS with Syrian refugees. Methods and analysis Five pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and seven fully powered RCTs conducted within STRENGTHS will be combined into one IPD meta-analytic dataset. The RCTs include Syrian refugees of 18 years and above with elevated psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10>15)) and impaired daily functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0>16)). Participants are randomised into the intervention or care as usual control group, and complete follow-up assessments at 1-week, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes are symptoms of depression and anxiety (25-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist). Secondary outcomes include daily functioning (WHODAS 2.0), PTSD symptoms (PTSD Checklist for DSM-5) and self-identified problems (PSYCHLOPS). We will conduct a one-stage IPD meta-analysis using linear mixed models. Quality of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach, and the economic evaluation approach will be assessed using the CHEC-list. Ethics and dissemination Local ethical approval has been obtained for each RCT. This IPD meta-analysis does not require ethical approval. The

Introduction: The World Health Organization's (WHO) scalable psychological interventions, such as Problem Management Plus (PM+) and Step-by-Step (SbS) are designed to be cost-effective non-specialist delivered interventions to reduce symptoms of common mental disorders, such as anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The STRENGTHS consortium aims to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation of the individual format of PM+ and its group version (gPM+), as well as of the digital SbS intervention among Syrian refugees in seven countries in Europe and the Middle East. This is a study protocol for a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to evaluate (1) overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and (2) treatment moderators of PM+, gPM+ and SbS with Syrian refugees. Methods and analysis: Five pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and seven fully powered RCTs conducted within STRENGTHS will be combined into one IPD meta-analytic dataset. The RCTs include Syrian refugees of 18 years and above with elevated psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10>15)) and impaired daily functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0>16)). Participants are randomised into the intervention or care as usual control group, and complete follow-up assessments at 1-week, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes are symptoms of depression and anxiety (25-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist). Secondary outcomes include daily functioning (WHODAS 2.0), PTSD symptoms (PTSD Checklist for DSM-5) and self-identified problems (PSYCHLOPS). We will conduct a one-stage IPD meta-analysis using linear mixed models. Quality of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach, and the economic evaluation approach will be assessed using the CHEC-list. Ethics and dissemination: Local ethical approval has been obtained for each RCT. This IPD meta-analysis does not require ethical approval. The re

Background: Little is known about changes of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in potentially disadvantaged groups. We investigated changes in anxiety and depression symptoms during the first year of the pandemic in six European countries and Australia by prior mental disorders and migration status. Methods: Overall, 4674 adults answered a web-based survey in May-June 2020 and were followed by three repeated surveys up to February 2021. Information on psychosocial, financial and demographic, living conditions, prior mental disorders, depression and anxiety symptoms during the pandemic and migration status was collected. Weighted general estimation equations modelling was used to investigate the association between prior mental disorders, migration status, and symptoms over time. Results: Most participants were <40 years old (48%), women (78%) and highly educated (62%). The baseline prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms ranged between 19%-45% and 13%-35%, respectively. In most countries, prevalence rates remained unchanged throughout the pandemic and were higher among people with prior mental disorders than without even after adjustment for several factors. We observed interactions between previous mental disorders and symptoms of anxiety or depression over time in two countries. No difference by migration status was noted. Limitations: Convenience sampling limits generalizability. Self-assessed symptoms of depression and anxiety might involve some misclassification. Conclusions: Depression and anxiety symptoms were worse among individuals with prior mental disorders than without, but there was no clear trend of worsening mental health in the observed groups during the observed period.

Background: The lack of availability of evidence-based services for people exposed to adversity globally has led to the development of psychological interventions with features that will likely make them more scalable. The evidence for the efficacy of e-mental health from high-income countries is compelling, and the use of these interventions could be a way to increase the coverage of evidence-based psychological interventions in low- and middle-income countries. Step-by-Step is a brief (5-session) intervention proposed by the World Health Organization as an innovative approach to reducing the suffering and disability associated with depression. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a locally adapted version of Step-by-Step with Syrian nationals (trial 1) and Lebanese nationals and other populations residing in Lebanon (trial 2). Methods: This Step-by-Step trial involves 2 parallel, two-armed, randomized controlled trials comparing the e-intervention Step-by-Step to enhanced care as usual in participants with depressive symptoms and impaired functioning. The randomized controlled trials are designed and powered to detect effectiveness in 2 populations: Syrians in Lebanon (n=568) and other people residing in Lebanon (n=568; Lebanese nationals and other populations resident in Lebanon). The primary outcomes are depressive symptomatology (measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) and functioning (measured with the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale 2.0). Secondary outcomes include anxiety symptoms, posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, personalized measures of psychosocial problems, subjective well-being, and economic effectiveness. Participants are mainly recruited through online advertising. Additional outreach methods will be used if required, for example through dissemination of information through partner agencies and organizations. They can access the intervention on a computer, tablet, and