Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the 12-item Arabic World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) as a screening tool for Syrian refugees

Background The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a generic measure of functional impairment and disability but to date no studies have reported its applicability in a population of Syrian refugees. Aims The aim of this study was to explore the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Arabic version of the WHODAS 2.0 among a population of Syrian refugees in a Jordanian refugee camp setting. The tool was used as part of a screening procedure for a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of a low-intensity psychological intervention. Method A representative sample of Syrian refugees (n = 650) were screened to assess levels of functional impairment and psychological distress. The screening results were used to explore the internal consistency and dimensionality of the WHODAS 2.0. We assessed level of convergence with the validated Kessler 10-item Psychological Distress Scale (K10), which assesses psychological distress. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to explore the construct validity and factor structure of the WHODAS 2.0. Results The mean baseline WHODAS 2.0 score was 20.5 (s.d. = 7.6). The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha 0.74), with all 12-items appearing to be related to the same construct. The WHODAS 2.0 was positively correlated with the K10 (r = 0.57, P < 0.001). The results of the EFA identified a three-factor solution accounting for 51% of variation, corresponding with factors related to self-activities, external activities and self-care. CFA results indicated good fit of the three-factor solution. Conclusions The results indicated that the WHODAS 2.0 has a three-factor solution and is an acceptable screening tool for use among Syrian refugees

Psychiatric Disorders in Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons After Forced Displacement: A Systematic Review

Background: Protracted armed conflicts not only shape political, legal, and socio-economic structures, but also have a lasting impact on people's human migration. In 2017, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees reported an unprecedented number of 65.6 million individuals who were displaced worldwide as a result of armed conflicts. To date, however, little is known about these people's mental health status. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the prevalence of psychiatric disorders among forcibly displaced populations in settings of armed conflicts.Methods: We undertook a database search using Medline, PsycINFO, PILOTS, and the Cochrane Library, using the following keywords and their appropriate synonyms to identify relevant articles for possible inclusion: “mental health,” “refugees,” “internally displaced people,” “survey,” and “war.” This search was limited to original articles, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published after 1980. We reviewed studies with prevalence rates of common psychiatric disorders—mood and anxiety disorders, psychotic disorders, personality disorders, substance abuse, and suicidality—among adult internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees afflicted by armed conflicts.Results: The search initially yielded 915 articles. Of these references 38 studies were eligible and provided data for a total of 39,518 adult IDPs and refugees from 21 countries. The highest prevalence were for reported for post-traumatic stress disorder (3–88%), depression (5–80%), and anxiety disorders (1–81%) with large variation. Only 12 original articles reported about other mental disorders.Conclusions: These results show a substantial lack of data concerning the wider extent of psychiatric disability among people living in protracted displacement situations. Ambitious assessment programs are needed to support the implementation of sustainable global mental health policies in war-torn countries. Finally, there is an urgent need for large-scale interventions that address psychiatric disorders in refugees and internally displaced persons after displacement

Universal, selective and indicated interventions for supporting mental health at the workplace: an umbrella review of meta-analyses

The current umbrella review aimed to assess and summarise evidence on universal, selective and indicated interventions for mental health at the workplace. This umbrella review forms one of the evidence reviews which were commissioned by the WHO to develop global guidelines on mental health at work. We conducted systematic searches in five bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane and Global Medicus Index) and included meta-analyses of randomised trials examining psychosocial, physical activity and lifestyle interventions delivered to all general workers (universal interventions), at-risk workers (selective interventions) and workers already experiencing symptoms of mental disorders (indicated interventions). We included outcomes from seven domains: symptoms of mental health conditions, positive mental health, quality of life, work-related outcomes, substance use, suicide-related outcomes and potential adverse effects. We identified 16 meta-analyses producing 66 pooled effect sizes of the examined interventions, mostly on symptoms of mental health conditions (n=43 pooled effect sizes) (eg, burnout, insomnia, stress) and positive mental health (n=15) (eg, well-being). Most of the evidence on universal, selective and indicated interventions was focused on psychosocial interventions, showing small to moderate effects across the various outcomes. Certainty levels according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) were low to very low in almost all of the examined outcomes. The results of existing meta-analyses are promising for the use of preventative and early treatment interventions in the workplace. However, the quality and certainty of the evidence were very modest, and further research on the effectiveness of these interventions is warranted

Mental health at work: WHO guidelines

[no abstract available

Scaling-up problem management plus for refugees in Switzerland - a qualitative study

Background: Refugees are at an increased risk of developing symptoms of mental disorders but face various structural and socio-cultural barriers to accessing mental health care. The SPIRIT project (Scaling-up Psychological Interventions in Refugees In SwiTzerland) seeks to promote the resilience of refugees and improve their access to mental health care. For this purpose, Problem Management Plus (PM+), an evidence-based low-intensity psychological intervention delivered by trained non-specialist “helpers”, is being scaled-up in Switzerland. Objective: To identify factors influencing the process of the large-scale implementation of PM + for refugees in Switzerland and to develop recommendations to guide the implementation process. Methods: 22 semi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants (Syrian refugees who previously participated in PM+, PM + helpers, health professionals working with refugees and decision-makers from the migration, integration, social, and health sectors). The data were analyzed using thematic analysis, combining an inductive and deductive approach. Results: The data revealed three major themes, which might have an impact for the longer-term implementation of PM + in Switzerland. First, preconditions for successful integration in the health system prior to scaling-up such as sustainable funding or the introduction of a stepped care approach. Second, the requirements for the PM + intervention supporting scale-up such as quality control during PM + delivery, PM + modality, time and setting when PM + is offered or the views on task sharing. Third, the perceived benefits of scaling-up PM + in Switzerland. Conclusions: Our results have shown that PM + must be scaled-up within a stepped care approach, including a functioning triage system and sustainable funding. Rather than selecting one modality or setting, it seemed preferable to offer a variety of formats and settings to achieve maximum reach and benefits. A successful scale-up of PM + in Switzerland might have various benefits. Communicating them to policy-makers and health providers, might enhance their acceptability of the intervention and their willingness to adopt PM + in regulatory structure and promote it

Residual posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms after provision of brief behavioral intervention in low‐ and middle‐income countries: An individual‐patient data meta‐analysis

Background: To address shortages of mental health specialists in low- and middle-income countries, task-shifting approaches have been employed to train nonspecialists to deliver evidence-based scalable psychosocial interventions. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a brief transdiagnostic nontrauma focused intervention for people affected by adversity. This study reports on the capacity of PM+ to address specific symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Methods: Individual patient data from three randomised controlled trials were combined and analysed to observe the impacts of PM+ (n = 738) or enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU) (n = 742) interventions on specific PTSD symptoms at posttreatment and 3-month follow-up. The PTSD-Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) was used to index PTSD symptoms, and presence of each symptom was defined as moderate severity (score ≥ 2 on individual items). Results: The average PCL-5 score at baseline was 26.1 (SD: 16.8) with 463 (31.3%) scoring above 33, indicative of a diagnosis of PTSD. Following intervention, 12.5% and 5.8% of participants retained a score greater than 33 at postassessment and follow-up, respectively. There was greater symptom reduction for PM+ than for ETAU for most symptoms. Hyperarousal symptoms were the most common residual symptoms after PM+, with more than 30% of participants reporting persistent sleep disturbance, concentration difficulties, and anger. Conclusion: PM+ led to greater reduction in symptoms relating to re-experiencing and avoidance. The evidence indicates that strategies focusing on hyperarousal symptoms including sleep, concentration, and anger difficulties, could be strengthened in this brief intervention

Research Review: Psychological and psychosocial interventions for children and adolescents with depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder in low- and middle-income countries - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThe incidence of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among children and adolescents residing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) poses a significant public health concern. However, there is variation in the evidence of effective psychological interventions. This meta-analysis aims to provide a complete overview of the current body of evidence in this rapidly evolving field.MethodsWe conducted searches on PubMed, Embase.com, and EBSCO/APA PsycInfo databases up to June 23, 2022, identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of psychological interventions in LMICs that targeted children and adolescents with elevated symptoms above a cut-off score for depression, anxiety, and PTSD, comparing a psychological or psychosocial intervention with other control conditions. We conducted random effects meta-analyses for depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms. Sensitivity analysis for outliers and high-risk studies, and analyses for the publication bias were carried out. Subgroup analyses investigated how the intervention type, intervention format, the facilitator, study design, and age group of the participant predicted effect sizes.ResultsThirty-one RCTs (6,123 participants) were included. We found a moderate effect of interventions on depression outcomes compared to the control conditions (g = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.06-0.99; NNT = 6.09) with a broad prediction interval (PI) (-1.8 to 2.86). We found a moderate to large effect for interventions on anxiety outcomes (g = 0.88; 95% CI: -0.03 to 1.79; NNT = 3.32) with a broad PI (-3.14 to 4.9). Additionally, a moderate effect was observed on PTSD outcomes (g = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.19-0.9; NNT = 5.86) with a broad PI (-0.64 to 1.72).ConclusionsPsychological and psychosocial interventions aimed at addressing depression, anxiety, and PTSD among children and adolescents in LMICs have demonstrated promising results. However, future studies should consider the variation in evidence and incorporate long-term outcomes to better understand the effectiveness of these interventions