Introduction: Task sharing holds promise for scaling up depression care in countries such as India, yet requires training large numbers of non-specialist health workers. This pilot trial evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a digital program for training non-specialist health workers to deliver a brief psychological treatment for depression. Methods: Participants were non-specialist health workers recruited from primary care facilities in Sehore, a rural district in Madhya Pradesh, India. A three-arm randomized controlled trial design was used, comparing digital training alone (DGT) to digital training with remote support (DGT+), and conventional face-to-face training. The primary outcome was the feasibility and acceptability of digital training programs. Preliminary effectiveness was explored as changes in competency outcomes, assessed using a self-reported measure covering the specific knowledge and skills required to deliver the brief psychological treatment for depression. Outcomes were collected at pre-training and post-training. Results: Of 42 non-specialist health workers randomized to the training programs, 36 including 10 (72%) in face-to-face, 12 (86%) in DGT, and 14 (100%) in DGT+ arms started the training. Among these participants, 27 (64%) completed the training, with 8 (57%) in face-to-face, 8 (57%) in DGT, and 11 (79%) in DGT+. The addition of remote telephone support appeared to improve completion rates for DGT+ participants. The competency outcome improved across all groups, with no significant between-group differences. However, face-to-face and DGT+ participants showed greater improvement compared to DGT alone. There were numerous technical challenges with the digital training program such as poor connectivity, smartphone app not loading, and difficulty navigating the course content—issues that were further emphasized in follow-up focus group discussions with participants. Feedback and recommendations collected from participants informed further modifications and refinements to the training programs in preparation for a forthcoming large-scale effectiveness trial. Conclusions: This study adds to mounting efforts aimed at leveraging digital technology to increase the availability of evidence-based mental health services in primary care settings in low-resource settings.
Objective Telepsychiatry involves use of telecommunications technology to deliver psychiatric care and offers promise to reduce costs and increase access to mental health services. This systematic review examined cost reporting of telepsychiatry programmes for mental healthcare. Methods We systematically searched electronic databases for studies reporting costs, including economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness analyses, or costs of developing telepsychiatry programmes for clinical care of mental disorders. Included studies enrolled participants with mental disorders and involved telepsychiatry for depression, anxiety disorders, serious mental illnesses including schizophrenia spectrum disorders and bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, dementia or epilepsy. Results Twenty-six unique studies met inclusion criteria (17,967 participants), with most targeting depression ( n = 7; 27%), general mental disorders and screening ( n = 7; 27%), child mental health ( n = 4; 15%) and geriatric mental health ( n = 4; 15%). Nearly all studies ( n = 25; 96%) compared telepsychiatry programme costs with either standard in-person consultation or usual care, with 15 (60%) reporting that telepsychiatry programmes were less expensive, and 8 (32%) showing telepsychiatry programmes were more expensive. Three studies reported cost-effectiveness analyses, favouring telepsychiatry programmes, but at highly elevated cost-effectiveness thresholds. Few studies reported costs of developing or delivering telepsychiatry programmes. Conclusion Costs of telepsychiatry programmes varied widely, with substantial heterogeneity in how costs were defined and reported. Some programmes cost less than in-person services while others cost more. Therefore, rigorous cost-effectiveness studies following established standards in economic evaluation are needed to inform implementation and sustainability of these programmes in health systems.
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.