| Literature DB >> 26985235 |
Najia Atif1, Karina Lovell2, Nusrat Husain3, Siham Sikander4, Vikram Patel5, Atif Rahman6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Perinatal depression is a public health problem in low and middle income countries. Although effective psychosocial interventions exist, a major limitation to their scale up is the scarcity of mental health professionals. The aim of this study was to explore the facilitators and barriers to the acceptability of peer volunteers (PVs)-volunteer lay women from the community with shared socio-demographic and life experiences with the target population-as delivery agents of a psychosocial intervention for perinatal depression in a rural area of Pakistan.Entities:
Keywords: Low and middle income countries; Peer volunteers; Perinatal depression; Psychosocial intervention; Task shifting; Thinking Healthy Programme
Year: 2016 PMID: 26985235 PMCID: PMC4793537 DOI: 10.1186/s13033-016-0055-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst ISSN: 1752-4458
Sociodemographic of Pakistan
| Variable | Value | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Population | 182 million |
| 2 | Life expectancy | 65 years |
| 3 | Fertility rate | 3.8 |
| 4 | Women in child-bearing age (15–49 years) | 27.5 % |
| 5 | Population below the poverty line | 21 % |
| 6 | Overall literacy rate | 57 % |
| 7 | Women’s literacy rate | 34 % |
| 7 | Contraception usage | 35.4 % |
| 8 | Births attended by skilled birth attendant | 52.1 % |
| 9 | Infant mortality rate | 6.9 % |
| 10 | Child mortality rate | 8.9 % |
| 11 | Maternal mortality rates | 0.276 % |
| 12 | Children underweight | 31.5 % |
Source
1: THE World Bank. 2013. Data [Online]. Available: http://data.worldbank.org. [Accessed 15 November 2014]
2–3: United Nation Development Report. 2013. Data [Online]. Available: http://www.pk.undp.org/content/pakistan/en/home/countryinfo/. [Accessed 10 October 2014]
4–7: Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey. 2013. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, Government of Pakistan
8–12: Pakistan Millennium Development goals report. 2013. Planning Commission, Government of Pakistan
Characteristics of the participants
|
| |
| Age | Mean = 28 years (range: 21–45 years) |
| Marital status | Married = 21 |
| Education | Mean = 6.6 years (range: 0–14 years) |
| No. of children | Mean = 3 (range: 1–9 children) |
| Family structure | Jointa = 17 Nucleara = 4 |
|
| |
| Age | Mean = 33 years (range: 26–40 years) |
| Marital status | Married = 6 |
| Education | Mean = 11 years (range: 10–14 years) |
| No of children | Mean = 2 (range: 1–4 children) |
| Family structure | Joint = 6 Nuclear = 2 |
|
| |
| Job title | Lady health workers = 3, lady health supervisors = 1, medical officer = 1 |
| Years of experience | Mean = 10 years (range: 5–18 years) |
|
| |
| Relationship with the mother | Husbands = 5 Mothers-in-law = 10 |
| Years of schooling | Husbands’ mean = 8.4 years (range: 8–10 years) |
aJoint family structure consists of multiple generations of a family living in the same house. Nuclear family structure consists of one married couple and their children
Selection criteria for the PVs
| Domain | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Qualification | At least 10 years of formal education (equivalent to GCSE) |
| Experience | Socio-demographic background and life experiences similar to that of the target population |
| Emotional maturity/range of life experience | |
| Personal attributes | Willingness to learn new skills |
| Good interpersonal skills | |
| Ability to relate to mothers and their families | |
| Ability to maintain a balance between home and work responsibilities | |
| Trustworthy, empathetic, respectful and enthusiastic | |
| Knowledge/understanding | Some understanding of mother and child health issues |
| Other requirements | Fluent in local language |
| Able to move in the community freely including if the target population is slightly far off from her place of residence |
Areas included in the topic guide
| Mothers |
| Understanding of perinatal depression, its causes and treatment |
| PVs |
| Expectations from the PV’s role |
| PHC staff |
| Experience of working in partnership with peer-delivered intervention programme |
| Significant family members |
| Understanding of perinatal depression, its causes and its treatment |
Qualitative interview results
| Category | Themes | Quote (source—interviews unless stated) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Facilitators to community acceptability | 1.1 High level of need |
|
| 1.2 Desirable PV characteristics |
| |
| 1.3 Linkage with local PHC system |
| |
| 1.4 Intervention perceived positive |
| |
| 2. Facilitators to PV motivation | 2.1 Personal gains |
|
| 2.2 Family and community endorsement |
| |
| 2.3 Good training and supervision |
| |
| 3. Barriers to community acceptability | 3.1 Stigma of mental illness |
|
| 3.2 Societal and cultural barriers |
| |
| 4. Barriers to PV motivation | 4.1 Lack of engagement of mothers |
|
| 4.2 Resistance from mothers family |
|
Fig. 1Synthesis of study findings in the form of a matrix
Checklist for acceptance and motivation of peer-volunteers (CHAMPs)
|
|
|
|
| 1 | Is the intervention perceived to be useful by the target population? | |
| 2 | Has the intervention been adapted for delivery by the PVs? | |
| 3 | Has the intervention been adapted for cultural relevance? | |
| 4 | Does the intervention allow flexibility of delivery (e.g., format, location)? | |
|
|
| |
| 5 | Is there a sufficiently large pool of potential PVs willing to work? | |
| 6 | Are the PVs locally based? | |
| 7 | Are the PVs matched to the target population? (gender, age, socioeconomic status, language etc.) | |
| 8 | Do the PVs share life-experiences with the target population? (similar life events, psychosocial stresses, shared experience of illness or condition etc.) | |
| 9 | Do the PVs enjoy the trust and goodwill of the target population? | |
|
|
| |
| 10 | Is the PV programme supported by local health providers? | |
| 11 | Are local health providers involved in the identification, recruitment, training and embedding of PVs in the community? | |
| 12 | Are local health providers kept up-to-date with progress of the programme? | |
|
|
| |
| 13 | Is the training and supervision appropriate to the level of PVs qualifications and capacity? | |
| 14 | Do the trainers and supervisors possess good knowledge of local culture? | |
| 15 | Is supervision adequate to the individual needs of the PVs? | |
| 16 | Does supervision facilitate group and experiential learning? | |
|
|
| |
| 17 | Is there an organisational structure in place to support the day-to-day work of the PV? | |
| 18 | Is the organisational structure responsive to new challenges? (e.g., emotional need, managing expectations of PVs and community) | |
|
|
| |
| 19 | Are PVs’ incentives matched to their expectations? [e.g., fixed monetary incentives (salary), other monetary incentives (travel, allowances), opportunities for personal development, appreciation from the community] | |
| 20 | Is the community approving of the PVs’ role? | |
| 21 | Are PVs’ own families supportive of their role? |
This checklist is designed to help implementers assess if their peer-delivered programme takes into account factors that are likely to improve the community acceptance and motivation of peer-volunteers in their role. Any ‘No’ response should be discussed as a potential barrier to programme implementation