No abstract

Primary headache disorders are a major public-health problem globally and, possibly more so, in low- and middle-income countries. No methodologically sound studies of prevalence and burden of headache in the adult Indian population have been published previously. The present study was a door-to-door cold-calling survey in urban and rural areas in and around Bangalore, Karnataka State. From 2,714 households contacted, 2,514 biologically unrelated individuals were eligible for the survey and 2,329 (92.9 %) participated (1,103 [48 %] rural; 1,226 [52 %] urban; 1,141 [49 %] male; 1,188 [51 %] female; mean age 38.0 years). The focus was on primary headache (migraine and tension-type headache [TTH]) and medication-overuse headache. A structured questionnaire administered by trained lay interviewers was the instrument both for diagnosis (algorithmically determined from responses) and burden estimation. The screening question enquired into headache in the last year. The validation study compared questionnaire-based diagnoses with those obtained soon after through personal interview by a neurologist in a random sub-sample of participants (n = 381; 16 %). It showed high values (>80 %) for sensitivity, specificity and predictive values for any headache, and for specificity and negative predictive value for migraine and TTH. Kappa values for diagnostic agreement were good for any headache (0.69 [95 % CI 0.61–0.76]), moderate (0.46 [0.35–0.56]) for migraine and fair (0.39 [0.29–0.49]) for TTH.The survey methodology, including identification of and access to participants, proved feasible. The questionnaire proved effective in the survey population. The study will give reliable estimates of the prevalence and burden of headache, and of migraine and TTH specifically, in urban and rural Karnataka.

Background: Recognizing the need for good quality, scientific and reliable information for strengthening mental health policies and programmes, the National Mental Health Survey (NMHS) of India was implemented by National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bangalore, in the year 2015–2016. Aim: To estimate the prevalence, socio-demographic correlates and treatment gap of mental morbidity in a representative population of India. Methods: NMHS was conducted across 12 Indian states where trained field investigators completed 34,802 interviews using tablet-assisted personal interviews. Eligible study subjects (18+ years) in households were selected by a multi-stage, stratified, random cluster sampling technique. Mental morbidity was assessed using MINI 6. Three-tier data monitoring system was adopted for quality assurance. Weighted and specific prevalence estimates were derived (current and lifetime) for different mental disorders. Mental morbidity was defined as those disorders as per the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Diagnostic Criteria for Research (ICD-10 DCR). Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to examine risk for mental morbidity by different socio-demographic factors. Survey was approved by central and state-level institutional ethical committees. Results: The weighted lifetime prevalence of ‘any mental morbidity’ was estimated at 13.67% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 13.61, 13.73) and current prevalence was 10.56% (95% CI = 10.51, 10.61). Mental and behavioural problems due to psychoactive substance use (F10–F19; 22.44%), mood disorders (F30–F39; 5.61%) and neurotic and stress-related disorders (F40–F48; 3.70%) were the most commonly prevalent mental morbidity in India. The overall prevalence was estimated to be higher among males, middle-aged individuals, in urban-metros, among less educated and in households with lower income. Treatment gap for overall mental morbidity was 84.5%. Conclusion: NMHS is the largest reported survey of mental morbidity in India. Survey estimated that nearly 150 million individuals suffer from one or the other mental morbidity in India. This information is to be used for planning, delivery and evaluating mental health programming in the country.

BackgroundPrimary headache disorders are among the commonest disorders, affecting people in all countries. India appears to be no exception, although reliable epidemiological data on headache in this highly populous country are not available. Such information is needed for health-policy purposes. Our aim was to estimate the prevalence of each of the headache disorders of public-health importance, and examine their sociodemographic associations, in urban and rural populations of Karnataka, south India.MethodsIn a door-to-door survey, 2,329 biologically unrelated adults (aged 18–65 years) were randomly sampled from urban (n = 1,226) and rural (n = 1,103) areas in and around Bangalore and interviewed by trained researchers using a pilot-tested, validated, structured questionnaire. ICHD-II diagnostic criteria were applied.ResultsThe observed 1-year prevalence of any headache was 63.9 %, with a female preponderance of 4:3. The age-standardised 1 year prevalence of migraine was 25.2 %; prevalence was higher among females than males (OR: 2.1 [1.7-2.6]) and among those from rural areas than urban (OR = 1.5 [1.3-1.8]). The age-standardized 1 year prevalence of TTH was 35.1 %, higher among younger people. The estimated prevalence of all headache on ≥15 days/month was 3.0 %; that of pMOH was 1.2 %, five-times greater among females than males and with a rural preponderance.ConclusionsThere is a very high 1 year prevalence of migraine in south India (the mean global prevalence is estimated at 14.7 %). Explanations probably lie in cultural, lifestyle and/or environmental factors, although the observed associations with female gender and rural dwelling are usual. Levels of TTH, pMOH and other headache on ≥15 days/month are similar to global averages, while the very strong association of pMOH with female gender requires explanation. Until another study is conducted in the north of the country, these are the best data available for health policy in a population of over 1.2 billion people.

Understanding the burden and pattern of mental disorders as well as mapping the existing resources for delivery of mental health services in India, has been a felt need over decades. Recognizing this necessity, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, commissioned the National Mental Health Survey (NMHS) in the year 2014–15. The NMHS aimed to estimate the prevalence and burden of mental health disorders in India and identify current treatment gaps, existing patterns of health-care seeking, service utilization patterns, along with an understanding of the impact and disability due to these disorders. This paper describes the design, steps and the methodology adopted for phase 1 of the NMHS conducted in India. The NMHS phase 1 covered a representative population of 39,532 from 12 states across 6 regions of India, namely, the states of Punjab and Uttar Pradesh (North); Tamil Nadu and Kerala (South); Jharkhand and West Bengal (East); Rajasthan and Gujarat (West); Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh (Central) and Assam and Manipur (North East). The NMHS of India (2015–16) is a unique representative survey which adopted a uniform and standardized methodology which sought to overcome limitations of previous surveys. It employed a multi-stage, stratified, random cluster sampling technique, with random selection of clusters based on Probability Proportionate to Size. It was expected that the findings from the NMHS 2015–16 would reveal the burden of mental disorders, the magnitude of the treatment gap, existing challenges and prevailing barriers in the mental-health delivery systems in the country at a single point in time. It is hoped that the results of NMHS will provide the evidence to strengthen and implement mental health policies and programs in the near future and provide the rationale to enhance investment in mental health care in India. It is also hoped that the NMHS will provide a framework for conducting similar population based surveys on mental health and other public health problems in low and middle-income countries.

ObjectivesThe National Mental Health Survey (NMHS) of India was undertaken with the objectives of (1) estimating the prevalence and patterns of various mental disorders in representative Indian population and (2) identifying the treatment gap, healthcare utilisation, disabilities and impact of mental disorders. This paper highlights findings pertaining to depressive disorders (DD) from the NMHS.DesignMultisite population-based cross-sectional study. Subjects were selected by multistage stratified random cluster sampling technique with random selection based on probability proportionate to size at each stage.SettingConducted across 12 states in India (representing varied cultural and geographical diversity), employing uniform, standardised and robust methodology.ParticipantsA total of 34 802 adults (>18 years) were interviewed.Main outcome measurePrevalence of depressive disorders (ICD-10 DCR) diagnosed using Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview V.6.0.ResultsThe weighted prevalence of lifetime and current DD was 5.25% (95% CI: 5.21% to 5.29%, n=34 802) and 2.68% (95% CI: 2.65% to 2.71%, n=34 802), respectively. Prevalence was highest in the 40–59 age groups (3.6%, n=10 302), among females (3.0%, n=18 217) and those residing in cities with population >1 million (5.2%, n=4244). Age, gender, place of residence, education and household income were found to be significantly associated with current DD. Nearly two-thirds of individuals with DD reported disability of varying severity, and the treatment gap for depression in the study population was 79.1%. On an average, households spent INR1500/month (~US$ 23.0/month) towards care of persons affected with DD.ConclusionAround 23 million adults would need care for DD in India at any given time. Since productive population is affected most, DD entails considerable socioeconomic impact at individual and family levels. This is a clarion call for all the concerned stakeholders to scale up services under National Mental Health Programme in India along with integrating care for DD with other ongoing national health programmes.

BackgroundHeadache disorders are common worldwide, causing pain and disability. India appears to have a very high prevalence of migraine, and of other headache disorders in line with global averages. Our objective was to estimate the burdens attributable to these disorders in order to inform health policy.MethodsIn a door-to-door survey, biologically unrelated adults (18–65 years) were randomly sampled from urban and rural areas of Bangalore and interviewed by trained researchers. The validated structured questionnaire enquired into several aspects of burden.ResultsOf 2,329 participants (non-participation rate 7.4 %), 1,488 (63.9 %; 621 male, 867 female) reported headache in the preceding year. Symptom burden was high. Migraine (1-year prevalence 25.2 %) occurred on average on 28 days/year but, in 38.0 % of cases (ie, 9.6 % of adults), on ≥3 days/month (≥10 % of days). All causes of headache on ≥15 days/month (prevalence 3.0 %) occurred on a mean of 245 days/year. Both these and migraine were rated severe in intensity.Participants with headache lost 4.3 % of productive time; those with migraine lost 5.8 % (equating to 1.5 % from the adult population). Lost paid worktime accounted for 40 % of this, probably detracting directly from GDP.We estimated population-level disability attributable to migraine using the disability weight from GBD2010 for the ictal state (0.433). Mean disability per person with migraine was 1.8 %, reducing the functional capacity of the entire adult population by 0.46 %.Fewer than one quarter of participants with headache had engaged with health-care services for headache in the last year. Actual expenditure on headache care was greatest among those with headache on ≥15 days/month (especially probable medication-overuse headache), but otherwise not high. Expressed willingness to pay for effective treatment for headache was higher, signalling dissatisfaction with current treatments.ConclusionsIn Karnataka State, southern India, prevalent headache disorders, especially migraine, give rise to commensurately heavy burdens. Limited access to health care fails to alleviate these. Structured headache services, with their basis in primary care, are the most efficient, effective, affordable and equitable solution. They could be implemented within the health-care infrastructure of India and are likely to be cost-saving. This solution requires political will, itself dependent on awareness.

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: Overall objective In order to assess the impact of delivery by non-specialist health workers (NSHWs) and other professionals with health roles (OPHRs) on the effectiveness of mental healthcare interventions in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs), we will specifically analyse the effectiveness of NSHWs and OPHRS in delivering acute mental health interventions; as well as the effectiveness of NSHWs and OPHRs in delivering long term follow-up and rehabilitation for people with mental disorders; and the effect of the detection of mental disorders by NSHWs and OPHRs on patient and health delivery outcomes. For each of these objectives we will examine the current evidence for the impact of delivery by NSHWs and OPHRs on the resource use and costs associated with mental healthcare provision in LMICs.