Scalability of digital psychological innovations for refugees: A comparative analysis in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden

E-mental health interventions may offer innovative means to increase access to psychological support and improve the mental health of refugees. However, there is limited knowledge about how these innovations can be scaled up and integrated sustainably into routine services. This study examined the scalability of a digital psychological intervention called Step-by-Step (SbS) for refugees in Egypt, Germany, and Sweden. We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 88) with Syrian refugees, and experts in SbS or mental health among refugees in the three countries. Data collection and analysis were guided by a system innovation perspective. Interviewees identified three contextual factors that influenced scalability of SbS in each country: increasing use of e-health, the COVID-19 pandemic, and political instability. Nine factors lay at the interface between the innovation and potential delivery systems, and these were categorised by culture (ways of thinking), structure (ways of organising), and practice (ways of doing). Factors related to culture included: perceived need and acceptability of the innovation. Acceptability was influenced by mental health stigma and awareness, digital trust, perceived novelty of self-help interventions, and attitudes towards non-specialist (e-helper) support. Factors related to structure included financing, regulations, accessibility, competencies of e-helpers, and quality control. Factors related to practice were barriers in the initial and continued engagement of end-users. Many actors with a potential stake in the integration of SbS across the three countries were identified, with nineteen stakeholders deemed most powerful. Several context-specific integration scenarios were developed, which need to be tested. We conclude that integrating novel e-mental health interventions for refugees into routine services will be a complex task due to the many interrelated factors and actors involved. Multi-stakeholder collaboration, including the involvement of end-users, will be essential.

Effects of a WHO-guided digital health intervention for depression in Syrian refugees in Lebanon: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most displaced people with mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries do not receive effective care, and their access to care has deteriorated during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Digital mental health interventions are scalable when digital access is adequate, and they can be safely delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined whether a new WHO-guided digital mental health intervention, Step-by-Step, in which participants were supported by a nonspecialist helper, was effective in reducing depression among displaced people in Lebanon. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a single-blind, 2-arm pragmatic randomized clinical trial, comparing guided Step-by-Step with enhanced care as usual (ECAU) among displaced Syrians suffering from depression and impaired functioning in Lebanon. Primary outcomes were depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9) and impaired functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule-12, WHODAS) at posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included subjective well-being, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and self-described problems. A total of 569 displaced people from Syria with depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) and impaired functioning (WHODAS > 16) were randomized to Step-by-Step (N = 283; lost to follow-up: N = 167) or ECAU (N = 286; lost to follow-up: 133). Participants were considered to be lost to follow-up when they did not fill in the outcome measures at posttest or follow-up. Recruitment started on December 9, 2019 and was completed on July 9, 2020. The last follow-up assessments were collected in December 2020. The study team had access to the online platform, where they could see treatment arm assignment for each participant. All questionnaires were completed by participants online. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses showed intervention effects on depression (standardized mean differences [SMDs]: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.26; 0.70; p < 0.001), impaired functioning (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.14; 0.56; p < 0.001), post-traumatic stress (SMD: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.16; 0.56; p < 0.001), anxiety (SMD: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.24; 0.68; p < 0.001), subjective well-being (SMD: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.26; 0.68; p < 0.001), and self-identified personal problems (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI 0.28; 0.70; p < 0.001). Significant effects on all outcomes were maintained at 3 months follow-up. During the trial, one serious adverse event occurred, unrelated to the intervention. The main limitation of the current trial is the high dropout rate. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that a guided, digital intervention was effective in reducing depression in displaced people in Lebanon. The guided WHO Step-by-Step intervention we examined should be made available to communities of displaced people that have digital access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769.

Guided digital health intervention for depression in Lebanon: randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Most people with mental disorders in communities exposed to adversity in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not receive effective care. Digital mental health interventions are scalable when digital access is adequate, and can be safely delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a new WHO-guided digital mental health intervention, Step-by-Step, supported by a non-specialist helper in Lebanon, in the context of concurring economic, humanitarian and political crises, a large industrial disaster and the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a single-blind, two-arm pragmatic randomised trial, comparing guided Step-by-Step with enhanced care as usual (ECAU) among people suffering from depression and impaired functioning. Primary outcomes were depression (Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9)) and impaired functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule-12 (WHODAS)) at post-treatment. FINDINGS: 680 people with depression (PHQ-9>10) and impaired functioning (WHODAS>16) were randomised to Step-by-Step or ECAU. Intention-to-treat analyses showed effects on depression (standardised mean differences, SMD: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.97), impaired functioning (SMD: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.65), post-traumatic stress (SMD: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.79), anxiety (SMD: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.99), subjective well-being (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.62) and self-identified personal problems (SMD: 0.56; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.83). Significant effects on all outcomes were retained at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Guided digital mental health interventions can be effective in the treatment of depression in communities exposed to adversities in LMICs, although some uncertainty remains because of high attrition. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Guided digital mental health interventions should be considered for implementation in LMICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769.

Associations of Depressive Symptoms, COVID-19-Related Stressors, and Coping Strategies. A Comparison Between Cities and Towns in Germany.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a wide range of stressors related to depressive symptoms. Prevention measures like physical distancing have burdened the general population, especially in highly urbanized areas. However, little is known about the associations between pandemic-related stressors, coping strategies, and depressive symptoms in highly urbanized vs. less urbanized environments. METHODS: Participants were recruited in a cross-sectional online survey in Germany. Propensity score matching yielded a matched sample of city (n = 453) and town (n = 453) inhabitants. Depressive symptoms, COVID-19-related stressors, and coping strategies were compared between cities and towns. Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine associations between pandemic-related stressors and depressive symptoms for the two groups separately. RESULTS: City inhabitants showed significantly higher depression scores than town inhabitants (t = 2.11, df = 897.95, p = 0.035). Seven coping strategies were more often used by the city sample. Depressive symptoms were associated with "restricted physical social contact" and "difficult housing conditions" (adjusted R 2= 0.19, F [9,443] = 12.52, p < 0.001) in city inhabitants, and with "fear of infection" and "difficult housing conditions" (adjusted R 2= 0.20, F [9,443] = 13.50, p < 0.001) in town inhabitants. LIMITATIONS: The data were collected at the end of the first wave and represent a snapshot without causal inferences. Pandemic-related stressors were measured with a newly developed scale. CONCLUSION: Depressive symptoms, perceived stressors, and approach/avoidance coping strategies differed between city vs. town inhabitants. These differences should be considered in policy-making and mental health care.