Perceived sustainability of psychosocial treatment in low- and middle-income countries in South-Eastern Europe.

BACKGROUND: DIALOG+ is an evidence-based, generic, cost-saving and easily deliverable psychosocial intervention, adaptable to clinicians' personal manner of interaction with patients. It was implemented in mental health services in five low- and middle-income countries in South-Eastern Europe during a 12-month randomised-controlled trial (IMPULSE) to improve the effectiveness of out-patient treatment for people with psychotic disorders. AIMS: To investigate barriers and facilitators to the perceived sustainability of DIALOG+ that has been successfully implemented as a part of the IMPULSE project. METHOD: Three months after the IMPULSE trial's end, perceived sustainability of the DIALOG+ intervention was assessed via a short survey of clinicians and patients who took part in the trial. Quantitative data collected from the survey were analysed using descriptive statistics; content analysis assessed qualitative survey data. The views and experiences of key informants (patients, clinicians and healthcare policy influencers) regarding the sustainability and scale-up of DIALOG+ were further explored through semi-structured interviews. These data were explored using framework analysis. RESULTS: Clinicians mostly appreciated the comprehensiveness of DIALOG+, and patients described DIALOG+ meetings as empowering and motivating. The barrier most commonly identified by key informants was availability of financial resources; the most important facilitators were the clinically relevant structure and comprehensiveness of the DIALOG+ intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Participants showed a willingness to sustain the implementation of DIALOG+. It is important to maintain collaboration with healthcare policy influencers to improve implementation of DIALOG+ across different levels of healthcare systems and ensure availability of resources for implementing psychosocial interventions such as DIALOG+.

Associations of lockdown stringency and duration with Google searches for mental health terms during the COVID-19 pandemic: A nine-country study.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the associations of lockdown stringency and duration with Google searches for four mental health concepts (i.e., "Anxiety," "Depression," "Suicide," "Mental Health") in nine countries (i.e., Hungary, India, Iran, Italy, Paraguay, Serbia, South Africa, Spain, Turkey) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We retrieved national-level data for each country from Google Trends and the Global Panel Database of Pandemic Policies. In our primary analysis, we used data from all countries to estimate a set of multilevel regression models examining associations of overall lockdown stringency and lockdown duration with relative search volumes for each mental health term. We repeated the models after replacing overall lockdown stringency with each of the lockdown stringency components. RESULTS: A negative association was found between overall lockdown stringency and "Depression." Lockdown duration and the most stringent stay-at-home requirements were negatively associated with "Anxiety." Policies that recommended or required the cancelation of public events evidenced negative associations with "Depression," whereas associations between policies that required some or all levels of schooling to close and "Depression" were positive. Policies that recommended or required workplaces to close and those that enforced quarantines on non-citizens arriving from high-risk regions or closed borders entirely were negatively associated with "Suicide." CONCLUSIONS: Lockdown duration and some lockdown policies during the COVID-19 pandemic were generally associated with significantly lower, rather than higher, Google searches for selected mental health terms. These findings could be used alongside other evidence to develop future lockdown strategies that are sensitive to mental health issues during public health crises.