| Literature DB >> 34026239 |
Asmae Doukani1, Robin van Dalen2, Hristo Valev3, Annie Njenga2, Francesco Sera4, Dixon Chibanda1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the largest care gap for common mental disorders (CMDs) globally, heralding the use of cost-cutting approaches such as task-shifting and digital technologies as viable approaches for expanding the mental health workforce. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a problem-solving therapy (PST) intervention that is delivered by community health volunteers (CHVs) through a mobile application called 'Inuka coaching' in Kenya.Entities:
Keywords: Community health workers; Friendship Bench; e-mental health; problem-solving therapy; sub-Saharan Africa
Year: 2021 PMID: 34026239 PMCID: PMC8127638 DOI: 10.1017/gmh.2021.3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Glob Ment Health (Camb) ISSN: 2054-4251
A summary of the five principles of the Inuka coaching intervention.
| Principle | Descriptions |
|---|---|
| Matching | Person seeking psychological support (client) is matched with a service provider. |
| Screening and support | The client is screened for CMDs using the SRQ-20 and is engaged in a structured conversation based on PST via a text-based chat with the service-provider. |
| Decision support for CHVs | The service-provider is provided with a set of structured scripts on what to say in each step of the intervention and how to build rapport via text-based chat. The service provider fills out an action plan which summarises the clients problems and next steps. |
| Referral | If the service provided is deemed insufficient by the client or if the service provider deems the client's presentation as severe, the client is referred to a mental health professional for diagnosis and treatment with their consent. |
| Promotion of psychological (self) care | The Inuka coaching app provdes information and self-assessment services that are contextualised for local settings to lower the barriers for seeking help. |
Fig. 1.Consort flow diagram of participant recruitment and assessment in a cohort pilot study.
Baseline characteristics of participants enrolled on the study (N = 60). Figures are numbers (percentages) of participants unless otherwise indicated.
| Baseline characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Female | |
| Male | |
| 20 year old or younger | |
| 21−30 years old | |
| 31−40 years old | |
| 41−50 years old | |
| 51 years old or older | |
| Single | |
| Married | |
| Divorced or separated | |
| No formal education |
|
| Primary school | |
| Secondary school | |
| College or tertiary intuition | |
| University degree | |
|
| |
| Less than KSh. 10000 | |
| More than KSh. 10000 | |
| Employed | |
| Unemployed | |
| House-wife | |
| Student | |
| Yes | |
| No | |
| Lost your loved one | |
| Lost or any of your close relative lost his/her job | |
| Heartbroken | |
| Relation issues with family member or relative? | |
| Undergoing some treatment or has been ill for some time (e.g. heart failure, HIV/AIDS, diabetes)? | |
| Family member or relative undergoing some treatment or has been ill for some time (e.g. heart failure, HIV/AIDS, diabetes)? | |
| Facing challenges with substance/drug abuse? | |
| Family member or relative currently facing challenges with substance/drug abuse? | |
| Experienced a traumatic event? | |
| Other issue that has caused you distress? | |
Note: s.d. = standard deviation, IQR = Inter-quarter-range.
Some baseline characteristics were merged for the analysis:
20 years of old and younger, and 21−30 years old were merged to form a new category ‘30 years and below’ (n = 42). All other categories were merged to form a second ‘31 years of age or older’ category” (n = 18).
Single, divorced and separated categories were merged to form a new category ‘single’ (n = 38), while ‘married’ stayed the same (ie. n = 22).
No formal education, primary school, secondary school categories were merged to form a new category ‘secondary school or below’ (n = 34), while college or tertiary institution and university degree were merged to form a second category ‘college or university educated’ (n = 26).
Suicidal ideation level was assessed at baseline through item 17 of the SRQ-20 questionnaire (‘thinking of ending life’) which is responded to with either a ‘yes’ indicating presence, and ‘no’ indicating absence.
Reason for seeking treatment was assessed through the Confounder's questionnaire. Only 46 participants completed this questionnaire.
45 out of the 46 people who completed the Confounders questionnaire provided a response for this item.
Mean, standard deviation and range for the SRQ-20, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 for pre- and post-treatment.
| Pre-treatment | Post-treatment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRQ-20 ( | ||||
| PHQ-9 ( | ||||
| GAD-7 ( | ||||
Note: s.d. = standard deviation, SRQ-20 = Self-reporting Questionnaire-20; PHQ-9=Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and GAD-7 = General Anxiety Disorder-7.
Summary of a multiple linear regression model for variables predicting SRQ-20, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 change scores.
| SRQ-20 | PHQ-9 | GAD-7 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | |||||||||
| Gender | |||||||||
| Income | |||||||||
| Marital status | |||||||||
| Suicidal ideation | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
Note: Age was centred at the means. SRQ-20 = Self-reporting Questionnaire; PHQ-9 = Patient Health Questionnaire-9; and GAD-7 = General Anxiety Disorder-7.
*p < 0.05. **p < 0.01.