Access to mental health and addiction services for youth and their families in Ontario: perspectives of parents, youth, and service providers.

BACKGROUND: Canadian youth (aged 16-24) have the highest rates of mental health and addiction concerns across all age groups and the most unmet health care needs. There are many structural barriers that contribute to the unmet mental health care needs of youth including lack of available and appropriate services, high costs, long wait times, fragmented and siloed services, lack of smooth transition between child and adult services, stigma, racism, and discrimination, as well as lack of culturally appropriate treatments. Levesque et al. (2013) developed a framework to better understand health care access and this framework conceptualizes accessibility across five dimensions: (1) approachability, (2) availability, (3) affordability, (4) appropriateness, and (5) acceptability. The purpose of this study was to explore access to addiction and mental health services for youth in Ontario, Canada from the perspectives of youth, parents, and service providers. METHODS: This qualitative study was a university-community partnership exploring the experiences of youth with mental health concerns and their families from the perspectives of youth, caregivers, and service providers. We conducted semi-structured interviews and used thematic analysis to analyze data. RESULTS: The study involved 25 participants (n = 11 parents, n = 4 youth, n = 10 service providers). We identified six themes related to structural barriers impacting access to youth mental health and services: (1) "The biggest barrier in accessing mental health support is where to look," (2) "There's always going to be a waitlist," (3) "I have to have money to be healthy," (4) "They weren't really listening to my issues," (5) "Having more of a welcoming and inclusive system," and (6) "Health laws aren't doing what they need to do." CONCLUSION: Our study identified five structural barriers that map onto the Levesque et al. healthcare access conceptual framework and a sixth structural barrier that is not adequately captured by this model which focuses on policies, procedures, and laws. The findings have implications for policies and service provisions, and underline the urgent need for a mental health strategy that will increase access to care, improve mental health in youth, decrease burden on parents, and reduce inequities in mental health policies and services.

Navigating inequities in the delivery of youth mental health care during the COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives of youth, families, and service providers.

OBJECTIVES: There have been concerns about the adverse effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadian youth (aged 16-24) as they have the highest rates of mental health concerns. The objectives of the present study were to explore the experiences of youth with mental health and/or addiction concerns and their families during the pandemic, and to examine how adequate and equitable mental health services have been for youth and families from the perspectives of youth, parents, and service providers. METHODS: Using a descriptive qualitative research design and a university-community partnership, we conducted individual interviews with youth, parents, and service providers. The study involved a total of 25 participants (n=15 service users, n=10 service providers). Among the service users, 11 participants were parents and four were youth. We used thematic analysis to analyze interview data. RESULTS: The thematic analysis identified three themes in the data: (1) youth mental health concerns have increased, whereas supports have decreased, (2) families end up being the treatment team with increased burden, little support, and lack of recognition, and (3) inadequate and inequitable mental health services for youth and families are amplified during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: At a time when mental health needs were higher, the mental health care system offered less support to youth and their families. For a more equitable response to the pandemic, we need an accessible and integrated mental health care system that shows a commitment to addressing social determinants and reducing health disparities and inequities in access to mental health services.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Les effets indésirables de la pandémie de COVID-19 sur les jeunes (16 à 24 ans) du Canada suscitent des inquiétudes, car ce sont les jeunes qui présentent les taux les plus élevés de problèmes de santé mentale. Nous avons voulu explorer les expériences de jeunes aux prises avec des problèmes de santé mentale et/ou de toxicomanie et de leurs familles durant la pandémie, et à déterminer si les services de santé mentale sont suffisants et équitables pour les jeunes et leurs familles du point de vue de jeunes, de parents et de prestataires de services. MéTHODE: À l'aide d'un plan de recherche qualitative descriptive et d'un partenariat entre les milieux universitaire et associatif, nous avons mené des entretiens individuels avec des jeunes, des parents et des prestataires de services. Vingt-cinq personnes ont participé à l'étude (n = 15 utilisateurs et utilisatrices de services, n = 10 prestataires de services). Parmi les utilisateurs et utilisatrices de services, 11 étaient des parents et 4 étaient des jeunes. Nous avons eu recours à l'analyse thématique pour analyser les données des entretiens. RéSULTATS: Trois thèmes se sont dégagés de l'analyse thématique des données : 1) les problèmes de santé mentale des jeunes augmentent, tandis que les mesures d'aide diminuent, 2) ce sont les familles qui finissent par constituer l'équipe de traitement, ce qui représente un fardeau accru, peu de soutien et un manque de reconnaissance, et 3) l'insuffisance et l'iniquité des services de santé mentale offerts aux jeunes et à leurs familles ont été amplifiées durant la pandémie. CONCLUSION: Alors que les besoins en santé mentale étaient plus élevés, le système de soins de santé mentale a offert moins de soutien aux jeunes et à leurs familles. Pour une intervention plus équitable face à la pandémie, nous avons besoin d'un système de soins de santé mentale accessible et intégré, manifestement engagé à aborder les déterminants sociaux et à réduire les disparités d'état de santé et les iniquités d'accès aux services de santé mentale.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among marginalized populations in the U.S. and Canada: Protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the development of safe and highly efficacious COVID-19 vaccines, extensive barriers to vaccine deployment and uptake threaten the effectiveness of vaccines in controlling the pandemic. Notably, marginalization produces structural and social inequalities that render certain populations disproportionately vulnerable to COVID-19 incidence, morbidity, and mortality, and less likely to be vaccinated. The purpose of this scoping review is to provide a comprehensive overview of definitions/conceptualizations, elements, and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among marginalized populations in the U.S. and Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The proposed scoping review follows the framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley, and further developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. It will comply with reporting guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The overall research question is: What are the definitions/conceptualizations and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy in the context of COVID-19 vaccines among adults from marginalized populations in the U.S. and Canada. Search strategies will be developed using controlled vocabulary and selected keywords, and customized for relevant databases, in collaboration with a research librarian. The results will be analyzed and synthesized quantitatively (i.e., frequencies) and qualitatively (i.e., thematic analysis) in relation to the research questions, guided by a revised WHO Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix. DISCUSSION: This scoping review will contribute to honing and advancing the conceptualization of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and broader elements and determinants of underutilization of COVID-19 vaccination among marginalized populations, identify evidence gaps, and support recommendations for research and practice moving forward.

An eHealth Intervention for Promoting COVID-19 Knowledge and Protective Behaviors and Reducing Pandemic Distress Among Sexual and Gender Minorities: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (#SafeHandsSafeHearts).

BACKGROUND: Existing data on COVID-19 disparities among vulnerable populations portend excess risk for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and other persons outside of heteronormative and cisgender identities (ie, LGBT+). Owing to adverse social determinants of health, including pervasive HIV and sexual stigma, harassment, violence, barriers in access to health care, and existing health and mental health disparities, sexual and gender minorities in India and Thailand are at disproportionate risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease. Despite global health disparities among LGBT+ populations, there is a lack of coordinated, community-engaged interventions to address the expected excess burden of COVID-19 and public health-recommended protective measures. OBJECTIVE: We will implement a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief, peer-delivered eHealth intervention to increase COVID-19 knowledge and public health-recommended protective behaviors, and reduce psychological distress among LGBT+ people residing in Bangkok, Thailand, and Mumbai, India. Subsequent to the RCT, we will conduct exit interviews with purposively sampled subgroups, including those with no intervention effect. METHODS: SafeHandsSafeHearts is a 2-site, parallel waitlist-controlled RCT to test the efficacy of a 3-session, peer counselor-delivered eHealth intervention based on motivational interviewing and psychoeducation. The study methods, online infrastructure, and content were pilot-tested with LGBT+ individuals in Toronto, Canada, before adaptation and rollout in the other contexts. The primary outcomes are COVID-19 knowledge (index based on US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] items), protective behaviors (index based on World Health Organization and US CDC guidelines), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2), and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2). Secondary outcomes include loneliness, COVID-19 stress, and intended care-seeking. We will enroll 310 participants in each city aged 18 years and older. One-third of the participants will be cisgender gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men; one-third will be cisgender lesbian, bisexual, and other women who have sex with women; and one-third will be transfeminine, transmasculine, and gender nonbinary people. Participants will be equally stratified in the immediate intervention and waitlist control groups. Participants are mainly recruited from online social media accounts of community-based partner organizations. They can access the intervention on a computer, tablet, or mobile phone. SafeHandsSafeHearts involves 3 sessions delivered weekly over 3 successive weeks. Exit interviews will be conducted online with 3 subgroups (n=12 per group, n=36 in each city) of purposively selected participants to be informed by RCT outcomes and focal populations of concern. RESULTS: The RCT was funded in 2020. The trials started recruitment as of August 1, 2021, and all RCT data collection will likely be completed by January 31, 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The SafeHandsSafeHearts RCT will provide evidence about the effectiveness of a brief, peer-delivered eHealth intervention developed for LGBT+ populations amid the COVID-19 pandemic. If the intervention proves effective, it will provide a basis for future scale-up in India and Thailand, and other low- and middle-income countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04870723; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04870723. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/34381.