Perspectives on an enhanced 'Improving Access to Psychological Therapies' (IAPT) service addressing the wider determinants of mental health: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: A new Health and Wellbeing pathway was introduced into the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) service in one geographical area of the UK in 2021 to address the wider determinants of mental health problems. It comprised assisted signposting to wider services and physical health promotion. This qualitative study aimed to understand stakeholders' experiences of implementing and receiving this new support and the barriers and facilitators to its delivery. METHODS: Forty-seven interviews were conducted, with service developers (n = 6), service deliverers (n = 12), service users (n = 22) and community and clinical partners (n = 7), as part of a larger mixed-methods evaluation. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes spanned all participant groups and represented key aspects of the service: (1) identifying suitability, (2) a holistic service, and (3) moving forward. The sub-themes represent the barriers and facilitators to processes working in practice, lending insight into potential service improvements. These included strengthening the quality of communication during referral and assessment, tailoring the support and delivery mode, and increasing transparency around continued care to drive sustained benefits. LIMITATIONS: Service users may have been selected due to their positive experiences of IAPT and were not demographically representative of the population, although participants' experiences of the service did suggest variation in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: The Health and Wellbeing pathway was perceived as having a positive impact on mental health and could reduce the burden on therapeutic services. However, service- and individual-level barriers need to be addressed to enhance statutory and community support links, manage service users' expectations, and improve accessibility for certain groups.

School-based peer education interventions to improve health: a global systematic review of effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: Peer education, whereby peers ('peer educators') teach their other peers ('peer learners') about aspects of health is an approach growing in popularity across school contexts, possibly due to adolescents preferring to seek help for health-related concerns from their peers rather than adults or professionals. Peer education interventions cover a wide range of health areas but their overall effectiveness remains unclear. This review aims to summarise the effectiveness of existing peer-led health interventions implemented in schools worldwide. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched for eligible studies in October 2020. To be included, studies must have evaluated a school-based peer education intervention designed to address the health of students aged 11-18-years-old and include quantitative outcome data to examine effectiveness. The number of interventions were summarised and the impact on improved health knowledge and reductions in health problems or risk-taking behaviours were investigated for each health area separately, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess quality. RESULTS: A total of 2125 studies were identified after the initial search and 73 articles were included in the review. The majority of papers evaluated interventions focused on sex education/HIV prevention (n = 23), promoting healthy lifestyles (n = 17) and alcohol, smoking and substance use (n = 16). Papers mainly reported peer learner outcomes (67/73, 91.8%), with only six papers (8.2%) focussing solely on peer educator outcomes and five papers (6.8%) examining both peer learner and peer educator outcomes. Of the 67 papers reporting peer learner outcomes, 35/67 (52.2%) showed evidence of effectiveness, 8/67 (11.9%) showed mixed findings and 24/67 (35.8%) found limited or no evidence of effectiveness. Of the 11 papers reporting peer educator outcomes, 4/11 (36.4%) showed evidence of effectiveness, 2/11 (18.2%) showed mixed findings and 5/11 (45.5%) showed limited or no evidence of effectiveness. Study quality varied greatly with many studies rated as poor quality, mainly due to unrepresentative samples and incomplete data. DISCUSSION: School-based peer education interventions are implemented worldwide and span a wide range of health areas. A number of interventions appear to demonstrate evidence for effectiveness, suggesting peer education may be a promising strategy for health improvement in schools. Improvement in health-related knowledge was most common with less evidence for positive health behaviour change. In order to quantitatively synthesise the evidence and make more confident conclusions, there is a need for more robust, high-quality evaluations of peer-led interventions using standardised health knowledge and behaviour measures.

The Peer Education Project to improve mental health literacy in secondary school students in England: a qualitative realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Worsening of adolescent mental health and exacerbated health inequalities after the COVID-19 pandemic calls for universal preventative strategies. The Mental Health Foundation's school-based Peer Education Project seeks to improve students' mental health literacy through peer educators (aged 14-18 years) teaching peer learners (aged 11-13 years) to recognise good and bad mental health, identify risk and protective factors, and seek help accordingly. Although previous before and after quantitative assessments have found the intervention to be effective, this realist evaluation aimed to qualitatively develop the theory of change, exploring how the mechanisms played out in different contexts to achieve the desired outcomes. METHODS: Our initial programme theory was developed following expert stakeholder consultation and reviewing the literature. We divided mechanisms into resources and reasoning to explain how the intervention components (ie, resources), experienced within specific contexts, engendered responses in the participants (ie, reasoning), to produce observable outcomes. Data collected from six purposively recruited schools in England comprised staff interviews (n=11), student focus groups (n=15), and observations (n=5). Deductive and inductive analysis was undertaken, using NVivo-informed multiple causal statements represented as context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOcs), to test and refine the programme theory. FINDINGS: We created several distinct CMOcs. For example, in learners accustomed to didactic teaching methods (context), conversing with educators having similar life experience (mechanism resource) endorsed and destigmatised help-seeking behaviour (mechanism reasoning) and facilitated a realisation that seeking help was appropriate and acceptable (outcome). Other mechanisms included the following: learners perceiving the information as tailored and relevant, educators feeling empowered, and a cultural shift percolating across the school. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show how peer education can work to improve mental health literacy, which will inform changes to the intervention to maximise its effectiveness in different operational contexts. Future research could test our theory of change in a randomised controlled trial, and examine impacts on inequalities in a more diverse sample. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research School for Public Health Research.