Support for Wellness Achievement Programme (SWAP): A Service for Individuals with At-Risk Mental State in Singapore

Rao, Sujatha; Pariyasami, Santhathevi; Tay, Sarah Ann; Lim, Lay Keow; Yuen, Spencer; Poon, Lye Yin; Lee, Helen; Verma, Swapna

doi:10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v42n10p552

Cited by 13 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given SCMs prominence as an emerging practice in efforts to transform YYA MHSU services (Birchwood & Singh, 2013; Douleh, 2013; Henderson et al, 2017; Hetrick et al, 2017; Illback & Bates, 2011; Malla et al, 2016; McGorry et al, 2013; McGorry & Goldstone, 2016; Rao et al, 2013; Verma et al, 2012), ensuring a fulsome consideration of factors critical to implementation is as important as a consideration of treatment effectiveness. Notably, the studies in this review largely lacked discussion of SCM implementation factors, such as the establishment and application of consistent definitions and operational criteria, concurrent assessment of organizational readiness and capacity, fit with existing clinician practices and organization policies, and fidelity monitoring (Aarons et al, 2011; Damschroder et al, 2009).…”

Section: Implementation and The Future Of Scms For Yyasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In response to the global concern of MHSU disorders affecting young people, new models of youth‐specific mental health services focusing on reforming service delivery to increase early access to care have been established in recent years (Hetrick et al, 2017; McGorry, 2019; McGorry & Goldstone, 2016; Settipani et al, 2019; Shah et al, 2020). Examples of these youth‐specific services can be found in Australia, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Denmark, as well as parts of Asia and the United States (Birchwood & Singh, 2013; Douleh, 2013; Henderson et al, 2017; Hetrick et al, 2017; Hickie et al, 2019; Illback & Bates, 2011; Malla et al, 2016; McGorry et al, 2013; McGorry & Goldstone, 2016; Rao et al, 2013; Verma et al, 2012). To optimize the access and efficiency of MHSU services for YYAs, stepped care models (SCMs) have emerged as one of the recommended frameworks for mental health care delivery (Bower & Gilbody, 2005; Cross & Hickie, 2017; Katon et al, 1997; Scogin et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scoping review of stepped care interventions for mental health and substance use service delivery to youth and young adults

Berger

Fernando

Churchill

et al. 2021

Early Intervention Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims Many young people with mental health and/or substance use concerns do not have access to timely, appropriate, and effective services. Within this context, stepped care models (SCMs) have emerged as a guiding framework for care delivery, inspiring service innovations across the globe. However, substantial gaps remain in the evidence for SCMs as a strategy to address the current systemic challenges in delivering services for young people. This scoping review aims to identify where these gaps in evidence exist, and the next steps for addressing them. Methods A scoping review was conducted involving both peer‐reviewed and grey literature. Eligible studies explored SCMs implemented in the various health care settings accessed by young people aged 12–24 seeking treatment for mental health and substance use challenges. After screening titles and abstracts, two reviewers examined full‐text articles and extracted data to create a descriptive summary of the models. Results Of the 656 studies that were retrieved, 51 studies were included and grouped by study team for a final yield of 43 studies. Almost half of the studies were focused on the adult population (i.e., 18 and over), and most did not specify interventions for young people. Among the SCMs, substantial variability was found in almost every aspect of the models. Conclusions Considering the current body of evidence, there is an urgent need for a consensus position on the definition, implementation, and outcome measures required for rigorously assessing the utility of SCMs for young people.

show abstract