↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group psychological intervention using cognitive behavioural strategies for women with common mental disorders in conflict-affected rural Pakistan…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
391 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group psychological intervention using cognitive behavioural strategies for women with common mental disorders in conflict-affected rural Pakistan: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-1905-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Chiumento, Syed Usman Hamdani, Muhammad Naseem Khan, Katie Dawson, Richard A. Bryant, Marit Sijbrandij, Huma Nazir, Parveen Akhtar, Aqsa Masood, Duolao Wang, Mark van Ommeren, Atif Rahman

Abstract

The impact of humanitarian disasters upon mental health is well recognised. The evidence for psychological interventions for mental health is mounting, but few interventions have been rigorously tested in humanitarian settings. To be sustainable in humanitarian settings interventions need to be short, simple, deliverable by nonspecialists under supervision, and adopt a transdiagnostic approach where an array of mental health outcomes are addressed simultaneously. These elements have been incorporated into the newly developed WHO Problem Management Plus (PM+) Group intervention. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the locally adapted PM+ Group intervention for women in Swat, Pakistan. This PM+ Group trial is a two-arm, single-blind, cluster randomised controlled trial conducted in a community-based setting with women in rural Pakistan. PM+ is delivered in partnership with the Lady Health Worker (LHW) Programme which provides community-based health care to women in Pakistan. Thirty-four LHW clusters will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation ratio using a permuted-block randomisation method. Participants screened and found to meet the inclusion criteria will be allocated to either the PM+ intervention group (n = 306), or the control arm (n = 306). The manualised PM+ intervention involves five sessions, each lasting 3 h, and introduces four strategies applied by participants to problems that they are facing. It is delivered by local female facilitators with a minimum of 16 years of education who are provided with targeted training and supervision. The primary outcome is individual psychological distress, measured by levels of anxiety and depression on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 20 weeks after baseline. Secondary outcomes include major depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, levels of social support, levels of functioning, and economic effectiveness. Intervention acceptability will be explored through an embedded qualitative study. The PM+ Group trial will provide important evidence on the effectiveness of an empirically supported psychological treatment delivered by nonspecialists in a humanitarian setting. If proven effective, the qualitative component will inform strategies for PM+ Group scale-up in health systems in other humanitarian settings. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, identifier: ACTRN12616000037404. Registered on 19 January 2016; WHO Protocol ID RPC705, v.4, 2 November 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 391 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 391 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 61 16%
Researcher 49 13%
Student > Bachelor 35 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 6%
Other 53 14%
Unknown 135 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 80 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 11%
Social Sciences 33 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 3%
Other 46 12%
Unknown 149 38%