↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of Technology-assisted Cascade Training and Supervision of community health workers in delivering the Thinking Healthy Program for perinatal depression in a post-conflict area of…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
459 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
The effectiveness of Technology-assisted Cascade Training and Supervision of community health workers in delivering the Thinking Healthy Program for perinatal depression in a post-conflict area of Pakistan – study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1308-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shamsa Zafar, Siham Sikander, Syed Usman Hamdani, Najia Atif, Parveen Akhtar, Huma Nazir, Joanna Maselko, Atif Rahman

Abstract

Rates of perinatal depression in low and middle income countries are reported to be very high. Perinatal depression not only has profound impact on women's health, disability and functioning, it is associated with poor child health outcomes such as pre-term birth, under-nutrition and stunting, which ultimately have an adverse trans-generational impact. There is strong evidence in the medical literature that perinatal depression can be effectively managed with psychological treatments delivered by non-specialists. Our previous research in Pakistan led to the development of a successful perinatal depression intervention, the Thinking Healthy Program (THP). The THP is a psychological treatment delivered by community health workers. The burden of perinatal depression can be reduced through scale-up of this proven intervention; however, training of health workers at scale is a major barrier. To enhance access to such interventions there is a need to look at technological solutions to training and supervision. This is a non-inferiority, single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Eighty community health workers called Lady Health Workers (LHWs) working in a post-conflict rural area in Pakistan (Swat) will be recruited through the LHW program. LHWs will be randomly allocated to Technology-assisted Cascade Training and Supervision (TACTS) or to specialist-delivered training (40 in each group). The TACTS group will receive training in THP through LHW supervisors using a tablet-based training package, whereas the comparison group will receive training directly from mental health specialists. Our hypothesis is that both groups will achieve equal competence. Primary outcome measure will be competence of health workers at delivering THP using a modified ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic factors (ENACT) rating scale immediately post training and after 3 months of supervision. Independent assessors will be blinded to the LHW allocation status. Women living in post-conflict areas are at higher risk of depression compared to the general population. Implementation of evidence-based interventions for depression in such situations is a challenge because health systems are weak and human resources are scarce. The key innovation to be tested in this trial is a Technology-assisted Cascade Training and Supervision system to assist scale-up of the THP. Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as GCC-THP-TACTS-2015, Identifier: NCT02644902 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 459 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Greece 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 457 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 72 16%
Researcher 57 12%
Student > Bachelor 43 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 9%
Student > Postgraduate 23 5%
Other 85 19%
Unknown 138 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 72 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 72 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 14%
Social Sciences 38 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 2%
Other 43 9%
Unknown 162 35%