Primary‐level worker interventions for the care of people living with mental disorders and distress in low‐ and middle‐income countries

Ginneken, Nadja; Chin, Weng Yee; Lim, Yen Chian; Ussif, Amin; Singh, Rakesh; Shahmalak, Ujala; Purgato, Marianna; Rojas-García, Antonio; Uphoff, Eleonora; McMullen, Sarah; Foss, Hakan Safaralilo; Thapa Pachya, Ambika; Rashidian, Laleh; Borghesani, Anna; Henschke, Nicholas; Chong, Lee-Yee; Lewin, Simon

BACKGROUND: Community‐based primary‐level workers (PWs) are an important strategy for addressing gaps in mental health service delivery in low‐ and middle‐income countries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of PW‐led treatments for persons with mental health symptoms in LMICs, compared to usual care. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, reference lists (to 20 June 2019). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of PW‐led or collaborative‐care interventions treating people with mental health symptoms or their carers in LMICs. PWs included: primary health professionals (PHPs), lay health workers (LHWs), community non‐health professionals (CPs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Seven conditions were identified apriori and analysed by disorder and PW examining recovery, prevalence, symptom change, quality‐of‐life (QOL), functioning, service use (SU), and adverse events (AEs). Risk ratios (RRs) were used for dichotomous outcomes; mean difference (MDs), standardised mean differences (SMDs), or mean change differences (MCDs) for continuous outcomes. For SMDs, 0.20 to 0.49 represented small, 0.50 to 0.79 moderate, and ≥0.80 large clinical effects. Analysis timepoints: T1 (<1 month), T2 (1‐6 months), T3 ( >6 months) post‐intervention. MAIN RESULTS: Description of studies 95 trials (72 new since 2013) from 30 LMICs (25 trials from 13 LICs). Risk of bias Most common: detection bias, attrition bias (efficacy), insufficient protection against contamination. Intervention effects *Unless indicated, comparisons were usual care at T2. “Probably”, “may”, or “uncertain” indicates "moderate", "low," or "very low" certainty evidence. Adults with common mental disorders (CMDs) LHW‐led interventions a. may increase recovery (2 trials, 308 participants; RR 1.29, 95%CI 1.06 to 1.56); b. may reduce prevalence (2 trials, 479 participants; RR 0.42, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.96); c. may reduce symptoms (4 trials, 798 participants; SMD ‐0.59, 95%CI ‐1.01 to ‐0.16); d. may improve QOL (1 trial, 521 participants; SMD 0.51, 95%CI 0.34 to 0.69); e. may slightly reduce functional impairment (3 trials, 1399 participants; SMD ‐0.47, 95%CI ‐0.8 to ‐0.15); f. may reduce AEs (risk of suicide ideation/attempts); g. may have uncertain effects on SU. Collaborative‐care a. may increase recovery (5 trials, 804 participants; RR 2.26, 95%CI 1.50 to 3.43); b. may reduce prevalence although the actual effect range indicates it may have little‐or‐no effect (2 trials, 2820 participants; RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.32 to 1.01); c. may slightly reduce symptoms (6 trials, 4419 participants; SMD ‐0.35, 95%CI ‐0.63 to ‐0.08); d. may slightly improve QOL (6 trials, 2199 participants; SMD 0.34, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.53); e. probably has little‐to‐no effect on functional impairment (5 trials, 4216 participants; SMD ‐0.13, 95%CI ‐0.28 to 0.03); f. may reduce SU (referral to MH specialists); g. may have uncertain effects on AEs (death). Women with perinatal depression (PND) LHW‐led interventions a. may increase recovery (4 trials, 1243 participants; RR 1.29, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.54); b. probably slightly reduce symptoms (5 trials, 1989 participants; SMD ‐0.26, 95%CI ‐0.37 to ‐0.14); c. may slightly reduce functional impairment (4 trials, 1856 participants; SMD ‐0.23, 95%CI ‐0.41 to ‐0.04); d. may have little‐to‐no effect on AEs (death); e. may have uncertain effects on SU. Collaborative‐care a. has uncertain effects on symptoms/QOL/SU/AEs. Adults with post‐traumatic stress (PTS) or CMDs in humanitarian settings LHW‐led interventions a. may slightly reduce depression symptoms (5 trials, 1986 participants; SMD ‐0.36, 95%CI ‐0.56 to ‐0.15); b. probably slightly improve QOL (4 trials, 1918 participants; SMD ‐0.27, 95%CI ‐0.39 to ‐0.15); c. may have uncertain effects on symptoms (PTS)/functioning/SU/AEs. PHP‐led interventions a. may reduce PTS symptom prevalence (1 trial, 313 participants; RR 5.50, 95%CI 2.50 to 12.10) and depression prevalence (1 trial, 313 participants; RR 4.60, 95%CI 2.10 to 10.08); b. may have uncertain effects on symptoms/functioning/SU/AEs. Adults with harmful/hazardous alcohol or substance use LHW‐led interventions a. may increase recovery from harmful/hazardous alcohol use although the actual effect range indicates it may have little‐or‐no effect (4 trials, 872 participants; RR 1.28, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.74); b. may have little‐to‐no effect on the prevalence of methamphetamine use (1 trial, 882 participants; RR 1.01, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.13) and functional impairment (2 trials, 498 participants; SMD ‐0.14, 95%CI ‐0.32 to 0.03); c. probably slightly reduce risk of harmful/hazardous alcohol use (3 trials, 667 participants; SMD ‐0.22, 95%CI ‐0.32 to ‐0.11); d. may have uncertain effects on SU/AEs. PHP/CP‐led interventions a. probably have little‐to‐no effect on recovery from harmful/hazardous alcohol use (3 trials, 1075 participants; RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.77 to 1.12) or QOL (1 trial, 560 participants; MD 0.00, 95%CI ‐0.10 to 0.10); b. probably slightly reduce risk of harmful/hazardous alcohol and substance use (2 trials, 705 participants; SMD ‐0.20, 95%CI ‐0.35 to ‐0.05; moderate‐certainty evidence); c. may have uncertain effects on prevalence (cannabis use)/SU/AEs. PW‐led interventions for alcohol/substance dependence a. may have uncertain effects. Adults with severe mental disorders *Comparisons were specialist‐led care at T1. LHW‐led interventions a. may have little‐to‐no effect on caregiver burden (1 trial, 253 participants; MD ‐0.04, 95%CI ‐0.18 to 0.11); b. may have uncertain effects on symptoms/functioning/SU/AEs. PHP‐led or collaborative‐care a. may reduce functional impairment (7 trials, 874 participants; SMD ‐1.13, 95%CI ‐1.78 to ‐0.47); b. may have uncertain effects on recovery/relapse/symptoms/QOL/SU. Adults with dementia and carers PHP/LHW‐led carer interventions a. may have little‐to‐no effect on the severity of behavioural symptoms in dementia patients (2 trials, 134 participants; SMD ‐0.26, 95%CI ‐0.60 to 0.08); b. may reduce carers' mental distress (2 trials, 134 participants; SMD ‐0.47, 95%CI ‐0.82 to ‐0.13); c. may have uncertain effects on QOL/functioning/SU/AEs. Children with PTS or CMDs LHW‐led interventions a. may have little‐to‐no effect on PTS symptoms (3 trials, 1090 participants; MCD ‐1.34, 95%CI ‐2.83 to 0.14); b. probably have little‐to‐no effect on depression symptoms (3 trials, 1092 participants; MCD ‐0.61, 95%CI ‐1.23 to 0.02) or on functional impairment (3 trials, 1092 participants; MCD ‐0.81, 95%CI ‐1.48 to ‐0.13); c. may have little‐or‐no effect on AEs. CP‐led interventions a. may have little‐to‐no effect on depression symptoms (2 trials, 602 participants; SMD ‐0.19, 95%CI ‐0.57 to 0.19) or on AEs; b. may have uncertain effects on recovery/symptoms(PTS)/functioning. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PW‐led interventions show promising benefits in improving outcomes for CMDs, PND, PTS, harmful alcohol/substance use, and dementia carers in LMICs.