IMPORTANCE Task sharing-or training of nonspecialist providers with no formal training in counseling-is an effective strategy to improve access to evidence-based counseling interventions and has the potential to address the burden of perinatal depression and anxiety.OBJECTIVES To identify the relevant implementation processes (who, what, where, and how) and to assess the effectiveness of counseling interventions delivered by nonspecialist providers for perinatal depression and anxiety in high-income countries. DATA SOURCES CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase through December 31, 2019. Relevant systematic reviews were also considered.STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials of counseling interventions that assessed depression or anxiety after intervention, delivered by a nonspecialist provider for adults, and that targeted perinatal populations in a high-income country were included. Self-help interventions that did not include a provider component were excluded.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Four researchers independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles, and 2 independently rated the quality of included studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the benefits of the interventions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline was followed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESFor implementation processes, the frequencies represented by a total or percentage were estimated, where the denominator is the total number of eligible trials, unless otherwise indicated. For effectiveness, primary and secondary outcome data of depression, anxiety, or both symptoms were used, with separate analyses for prevention and treatment, stratified by depression or anxiety. Subgroup analyses compared outcome types (anxiety vs depression) and study objectives (treatment vs prevention). RESULTSIn total, 46 trials (18 321 participants) were included in the systematic review; 44 trials (18 101 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Interventions were implemented across 11 countries, with the majority in Australia, UK, and US. Two-thirds (65%) of counseling interventions were provided by nurses and midwives, lasted a mean of 11.2 weeks (95% CI, 6.4-16.0 weeks), and most were delivered face to face (31 [67.4%]). Only 2 interventions were delivered online. A dearth of information related to important implementation processes, such as supervision, fidelity, and participant sociodemographic characteristics, was observed in many articles. Compared with controls, counseling interventions were associated with lower depressive symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.24 [95% CI, 0.14-0.34]; 43 trials; I 2 = 81%) and anxiety scores (SMD, 0.30 [95% CI,; 11 trials; I 2 = 80%). Treatment interventions were reported to be effective for both depressive symptoms (SMD, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.17-0.59]; 15 trials; I 2 = 69%) and anxiety symptoms (SMD, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.09-0.58]; 6 trials; I ...
Background. The aims of the current study were three-fold: i) to estimate the reliability and predictive validity of a therapy quality measure for use by peers; ii) to assess the extent to which peer delivery agents could be trained to evaluate their peers' counsellors as reliably as experts; and iii) to identify barriers and facilitators of several implemented models of peer supervision. Methods. 26 peers (called 'Sakhis' in the study context), with no previous experience or formal training in mental health care delivery, were trained by experts to deliver the Thinking Healthy Program Peerdelivered (THPP) and conduct peer-led supervision. Using the Therapy Quality Scale (TQS)-an 18 item Likert scale (0-2) measuring both general and treatment-specific skills-both peers and experts independently rated 167 individual sessions to estimate: a) the psychometric properties of TQS; and b) the mean difference between peer and expert TQS ratings; these data were analyzed using SAS 9.3. This was complemented with qualitative data (two rounds of in-depth interviews with four experts and focus group discussions with all Sakhis) which were analyzed using framework analysis. Results. We observed good internal consistency on TQS ratings among expert (α=0.814) and Sakhis (α=0.843) and good to excellent scores of inter-rater reliability among experts (ICC=0.779) and Sakhis (ICC=0.714). TQS ratings were not significantly related to patient depressive symptoms at 6-months post-child birth but were significantly related to patient activation scores (r=0.375, p<0.01 for treatment-specific skills and 0.313, p<0.01 for general skills) at 3-months post-child birth, which in turn were significantly related to depressive symptom scores at 6-months post-child birth (r=-0.455, p<0.001), highlighting a potential temporal pathway between therapy quality, patient behaviours and patient outcomes. Following additional training and with growing expertise, Sakhis eventually evaluated their peers' counselling sessions as reliably as experts-demonstrating no significant mean differences on general (t=-0.42, p>0.05) or treatment-specific (t=-1.44, p>0.05) subscale scores. Qualitative findings were also consistent between experts and Sakhis: barriers included peers' initial difficulties in rating the TQS and leading supervision which declined over time. Most Sakhis and experts reported the benefits of using a structured scale to rate therapy quality which in turn facilitated consistent and relevant feedback and motivation to ultimately improve Sakhis' counselling skills. In addition, most Sakhis and experts found that peer supervision methods were acceptable and feasible, particularly when linked to financial incentives and expert supervisor. Conclusion.With time, non-specialist or lay providers can be trained to implement peer supervision and assess therapy quality as reliably as experts using a psychometrically-sound measure. However, peer supervision with experts was more preferred than peer supervision without experts to facilitate structured, rel...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.