3.8 Article

Training for mental health professionals in responding to experienced and anticipated mental health-related discrimination (READ-MH): protocol for an international multisite feasibility study

期刊

PILOT AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s40814-022-01208-8

关键词

Stigma; Discrimination; Training; Health professionals; Mental health care; Objective structured Clinical examination; Health advocacy

资金

  1. Medical Research Council (MRC) [MR/R023697/1]
  2. Health and Family Planning Commission of Guangzhou Municipality [2016A031002]
  3. US National Institute of Mental Health [R01MH]
  4. UK Medical Research Council [MR/R023697/1, MR/S001255/1]
  5. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration South London at King's College London NHS Foundation Trust
  6. NIHR Asset Global Health Unit award
  7. National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health [R01MH100470]
  8. NIHR BRC at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London
  9. NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South London (NIHR ARC South London) at King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  10. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)/MRC grant - Adolescents' Resilience and Treatment nEeds for Mental health in Indian Slums (ARTEMIS) [MR/S023224/1]
  11. NHMRC/GACD grant [APP1143911]
  12. ASSET research programme - UK's National Institute of Health Research (NIHR
  13. NIHR Global Health Research Unit on Health Systems Strengthening in Sub-Saharan Africa at King's College London) from the UK Government [16/136/54]
  14. NIHR [NIHR200842]
  15. AMARI as part of the DELTAS Africa Initiative [DEL-[15-01]]
  16. Wellcome Trust [222154]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluates the feasibility, potential effectiveness, and costs of anti-stigma training for mental health professionals in low- and middle-income countries. The training aims to improve knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to addressing stigma and discrimination. The study uses a mixed methods approach, including quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. The strengths of the study include a participatory and contextualized approach, as well as alignment with the target population and training goals. Limitations include the generalizability of skills performance to routine care and the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on data collection.
Background: Mental health and other health professionals working in mental health care may contribute to the experiences of stigma and discrimination among mental health service users but can also help reduce the impact of stigma on service users. However, few studies of interventions to equip such professionals to be anti-stigma agents took place in high-income countries. This study assesses the feasibility, potential effectiveness and costs of Responding to Experienced and Anticipated Discrimination training for health professionals working in mental health care (READ-MH) across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is an uncontrolled pre-post mixed methods feasibility study of READ-MH training at seven sites across five LMICs (China, Ethiopia, India, Nepal and Tunisia). Outcome measures: knowledge based on course content, attitudes to working to address the impact of stigma on service users and skills in responding constructively to service users' reports of discrimination. The training draws upon the evidence bases for stigma reduction, health advocacy and medical education and is tailored to sites through situational analyses. Its content, delivery methods and intensity were agreed upon through a consensus exercise with site research teams. READ-MH will be delivered to health professionals working in mental health care immediately after baseline data collection; outcome measures will be collected post-training and 3 months post-baseline, followed by qualitative data collection analysed using a combined deductive and inductive approach. Fidelity will be rated during the delivery of READ-MH, and data on training costs will be collected. Quantitative data will be assessed using generalised linear mixed models. Qualitative data will be evaluated by thematic analysis to identify feedback about the training methods and content, including the implementability of the knowledge and skills learned. Pooled and site-specific training costs per trainee and per session will be reported. Conclusions: The training development used a participatory and contextualised approach. Evaluation design strengths include the diversity of settings, the use of mixed methods, the use of a skills-based measure and the knowledge and attitude measures aligned to the target population and training. Limitations are the uncertain generalisability of skills performance to routine care and the impact of COVID-19 restrictions at several sites limiting qualitative data collection for situational analyses.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据