| Literature DB >> 36042504 |
Saju Madavanakadu Devassy1,2,3, Lorane Scaria4,5, Natania Cheguvera5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study is a low-cost community mental health task-sharing model driven by university students to strengthen the mental health workforce in poor resource settings. This article presents the feasibility of a stepped referral model using the community health workforce and university students. The primary feasibility objective is to detect and refer people with mental illness from the community using a task-sharing approach.Entities:
Keywords: Community mental health; Health referral; India; Lay mental health worker; Mental health; Task sharing
Year: 2022 PMID: 36042504 PMCID: PMC9426017 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-022-01159-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud ISSN: 2055-5784
Feasibility objectives, outcome, and indicators
| Objectives | Outcome assessor |
|---|---|
| To generate a continuum of collaboration between community health infrastructure, university faculty, and student volunteers to screen, detect, and refer the people with mental illness | Human resource identification, Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the institutions to collaborate, and developing linkages with mental health service providers to establish referral pathways |
| To train the student volunteers and ASHAs to screen, diagnose, recommend appropriate stepped referral pathways, and introduce supervisory systems and processes | The competency for accurate diagnose and ability to recommend the detected patients to appropriate referral services |
| To test the accuracy and acceptability of community screening | Comparability of study results with similar studies and number of detected people accepting the referral recommendations |
Fig. 1Data collection process
Fig. 2Geospatial representation of the respondents
Rates of depression and suicidality among groups with different socio-demographics and chronic health conditions. N = 549
| Variables | Subject | Presence of depression | Presence of suicidal thoughts | Presence of suicidal ideation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 205 (37.34%) | 31 (15.12%) | 4 (1.95%) | 1 (0.49%) |
| Female | 344 (62.66%) | 9 (2.62%) | ||
| ≤ 24 | 112 (20.40%) | 26 (23.21%) | 5 (4.46%) | 0 |
| 25–44 | 265 (48.27%) | 51 (19.25%) | 17 (6.42%) | 6 (2.26%) |
| 45–64 | 120 (21.86%) | 32 (26.67%) | 13 (10.83%) | 4 (3.33%) |
| ≥ 65 | 52 (9.47%) | 3 (5.77%) | 0 | |
| APL | 324 (59.45%) | 61 (18.83%) | 17 (5.18%) | 5 (1.52%) |
| BPL | 221 (40.55%) | 5 (2.26%) | ||
| Not literate | 12 (2.21%) | 1 (8.33%) | 0 | |
| Did not complete primary education | 125 (22.77%) | 47 (37.60%) | 12 (9.60%) | 4 (3.2%) |
| Completed primary education | 156 (28.42%) | 38 (24.36%) | 14 (8.97%) | 2 (1.28%) |
| Completed secondary education | 93 (17.10%) | 21 (22.58%) | 5 (5.38%) | 2 (2.15%) |
| Completed tertiary—graduate/diploma | 125 (22.98%) | 21 (16.80%) | 6 (4.80%) | 2 (1.60%) |
| Completed tertiary—postgraduate | 38 (6.99%) | 3 (7.89%) | 0 | 0 |
| Unemployed | 127 (23.13%) | 33 (25.98%) | 6 (4.72 %) | 0 |
| Farming/fishing, etc., in own land | 196 (35.70%) | 63 (32.14%) | 14 (7.14 %) | 3 (1.53 %) |
| Daily wage jobs | 104 (18.94%) | 24 (23.08%) | 8 (7.69 %) | 4 (3.85 %) |
| Salaried employment | 104 (18.94%) | 13 (12.50%) | 9(8.65 %) | 3 (2.88 %) |
| Other business | 18 (3.28%) | 2 (11.11%) | 1 (5.56 %) | 0 |
| Unmarried | 126 (23.16%) | 27 (21.43%) | 6 (4.76%) | 0 |
| Married | 385 (70.13%) | 89 (23.12%) | 29 (7.53%) | 9 (2.34%) |
| Widowed | 32 (5.83%) | 16 (50.00%) | 2 (6.25%) | 1 (3.13%) |
| Divorced/separated | 6 (1.09%) | 3 (50.00%) | 1 (16.67%) | 0 |
| General | 160 (29.14%) | 27 (16.88%) | 8(5%) | 1 (0.63%) |
| SC/ST/OBC | 343 (68.19%) | 108 (27.76%) | 30 (7.71%) | 9 (2.31%) |
| 75 (13.66%) | 40 (53.33%) | 11 (14.67%) | 5 (6.67%) | |
| 69 (12.57%) | 25 (36.23%) | 3 (4.35%) | 0 | |
aHTN-self-reported hypertension
bDM-self-reported diabetes
Chronic illness and depressive symptoms
| Chronic conditions | Demographics | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Self-reported diabetes | Self-reported hypertension | Gender | Poverty level | ||||
| Depression | ||||||||
| Normal | 44 (63.77%) | 370 (77.08%) | 35 (46.67%) | 379 (79.96%) | 174 (84.9%) | 240 (69.8%) | 264 (80.5%) | 150 (67.9%) |
| Mild | 15 (21.74%) | 47 (9.79%) | 19 (25.33%) | 43 (9.07%) | 18 (8.8%) | 44 (12.8%) | 34 (10.4%) | 28 (12.7%) |
| Moderate | 4 (5.80%) | 42 (8.75%) | 9 (12.00%) | 37 (7.81%) | 8 (3.9%) | 38 (11%) | 25 (7.6%) | 21 (9.5%) |
| Severe | 3 (4.35%) | 13 (2.71%) | 9 (12.00%) | 7 (1.48%) | 1 (0.5%) | 15 (4.4%) | 3 (0.9%) | 13 (5.9%) |
| Extreme | 3 (4.35%) | 8 (1.67%) | 3 (4.00%) | 8 (1.69%) | 4 (0.2%) | 7 (0.2%) | 2 (0.6%) | 9 (4.1%) |
Factors associated with depression: linear regression analysis
| Variables | Unadjusted | Adjusted |
|---|---|---|
| Gender—female | 1.64 (0.75–2.52) | 1.73 (0.85–2.61) |
| Age | 0.04 (0.01–0.07) | |
| Poverty-BPL | 2.01 (1.14–2.88) | 1.93 (1.06–2.79) |
| Education | − 0.47 (− 0.68 to − 0.28) | − 0.41 (− 0.64 to − 0.17) |
| Chronic disease comorbidity | 2.03 (1.24–2.81) | 1.87 (1.00–2.74) |
Multinomial logistic regression analysis of suicidality with depression
| Suicidality and depression | Relative risk ratio (95% CI), |
|---|---|
| Suicidality—no risk | 1ref |
| Suicidality—medium risk | 11.6 (4.8–28.02 |
| Suicidality—high risk | 34.8 (4.4–277.7) |