"Problems you can live with" versus emergencies: how community members in rural Ethiopia contend with conditions requiring surgery.

BACKGROUND: 98% of people with surgical conditions living in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not receive safe, timely and affordable surgical and anesthesia care. Research exploring barriers to receiving care has tended to be narrow in focus, often facility-based and ignoring the community beliefs, experiences and behaviours that will be an essential component of closing the gap in surgical care. Using qualitative methods, we captured diverse community perspectives in rural Ethiopia: exploring beliefs, perceptions, knowledge and experiences related to surgical conditions, with the overall aim of (re)constructing explanatory models. METHODS: Our study was nested within a community-based survey of surgical conditions conducted in the Butajira Health and Demographic Surveillance Site, southern Ethiopia, and a follow-up study of people accessing surgical care in two local hospitals. We carried out 24 semi-structured interviews. Participants were community members who needed but did/did not access surgical care, community-based healthcare workers and traditional bone-setters. Interviews were conducted in Amharic, audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated into English. We initially carried out thematic analysis and we recognized that emerging themes were aligned with Kleinman's explanatory models framework and decided to use this to guide the final stages of analysis. RESULTS: We found that community members primarily understood surgical conditions according to severity. We identified two categories: conditions you could live with and those which required urgent care, with the latter indicating a clear and direct path to surgical care whilst the former was associated with a longer, more complex and experimental pattern of help-seeking. Fear of surgery and poverty disrupted help-seeking, whilst community narratives based on individual experiences fed into the body of knowledge people used to inform decisions about care. CONCLUSIONS: We found explanatory models to be flexible, responsive to new evidence about what might work best in the context of limited community resources. Our findings have important implications for future research and policy, suggesting that community-level barriers have the potential to be responsive to carefully designed interventions which take account of local knowledge and beliefs.

Consent, decisional capacity and guardianship in mental health research.

Background: Research with adults who cannot give informed consent has important social value. However, enrolling adults who cannot consent in research raises significant ethical concerns.  Methods: To evaluate how researchers in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) can assess individuals' decisional capacity, and the conditions under which it is appropriate, and the conditions under which it is not appropriate to include individuals who lack decisional capacity.  Results: In LMICs, where resources may be limited, implementing protections for adults with decisional incapacity can be especially challenging. Recognition of the ethical concerns, and awareness of the circumstances and available resources, offers the means to protect these vulnerable participants. Conclusions: Researchers in low and middle-income countries should be aware of steps they can take to ensure appropriate protections for subjects with decisional impairments while conducting clinical trials on methods to improve their clinical care.

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of task-shared care for people with severe mental disorders in Ethiopia (TaSCS): a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: There have been no trials of task-shared care (TSC) using WHO's mental health Gap Action Programme for people with severe mental disorders (psychosis or affective disorder) in low-income or middle-income countries. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of TSC compared with enhanced specialist mental health care in rural Ethiopia. METHODS: In this single-blind, phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial, participants had a confirmed diagnosis of a severe mental disorder, recruited from either the community or a local outpatient psychiatric clinic. The intervention was TSC, delivered by supervised, non-physician primary health care workers trained in the mental health Gap Action Programme and working with community health workers. The active comparison group was outpatient psychiatric nurse care augmented with community lay workers (PSY). Our primary endpoint was whether TSC would be non-inferior to PSY at 12 months for the primary outcome of clinical symptom severity using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Expanded version (BPRS-E; non-inferiority margin of 6 points). Randomisation was stratified by health facility using random permuted blocks. Independent clinicians allocated groups using sealed envelopes with concealment and outcome assessors and investigators were masked. We analysed the primary outcome in the modified intention-to-treat group and safety in the per-protocol group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02308956. FINDINGS: We recruited participants between March 13, 2015 and May 21, 2016. We randomly assigned 329 participants (111 female and 218 male) who were aged 25-72 years and were predominantly of Gurage (198 [60%]), Silte (58 [18%]), and Mareko (53 [16%]) ethnicity. Five participants were found to be ineligible after randomisation, giving a modified intention-to-treat sample of 324. Of these, 12-month assessments were completed in 155 (98%) of 158 in the TSC group and in 158 (95%) of 166 in the PSY group. For the primary outcome, there was no evidence of inferiority of TSC compared with PSY. The mean BPRS-E score was 27·7 (SD 4·7) for TSC and 27·8 (SD 4·6) for PSY, with an adjusted mean difference of 0·06 (90% CI -0·80 to 0·89). Per-protocol analyses (n=291) were similar. There were 47 serious adverse events (18 in the TSC group, 29 in the PSY group), affecting 28 participants. These included 17 episodes of perpetrated violence and seven episodes of violent victimisation leading to injury, ten suicide attempts, six hospital admissions for physical health conditions, four psychiatric admissions, and three deaths (one in the TSC group, two in the PSY group). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for TSC indicated lower cost of -US$299·82 (95% CI -454·95 to -144·69) per unit increase in BPRS-E scores from a health care sector perspective at 12 months. INTERPRETATION: WHO's mental health Gap Action Programme for people with severe mental disorders is as cost-effective as existing specialist models of care and can be implemented effectively and safely by supervised non-specialists in resource-poor settings. FUNDING: US National Institute of Mental Health.

COVID -19 vaccine hesitancy and determinants in Ethiopia: A national pilot survey.

Introduction: Despite major advances in Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine development, vaccine hesitancy threatens the progress made to curb the disease. We aimed to assess the level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and the underlying determinants in Ethiopia. Methods: A pilot mobile phone survey of adults in Ethiopia with mobile phones selected randomly. Results: The pilot survey included 614 participants who were predominantly male (71.7%), and married (68.2%) with a median age of 34 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 14.0). Overall, 150 (24.4%) participants reported to have been vaccinated; either the first [57 (38%)], second [19 (12.7%)], or both [74 (49.3%)] doses. About one in six participants (16.3%; n=100) reported vaccine hesitancy, with a significant difference by employment status, with self-employed more likely to show hesitancy [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.85, 95% CI (1.05-3.27)], and region. Major drivers of hesitancy were lack of interest [n=30 (30%)], fear of side-effects [n=24 (24%)], and lack of trust in the vaccine [n=13 (13%)]. Having chronic disease conditions in the family had no association with hesitancy (p > 0.05). Conclusion: While representativeness of the sample is an issue, the findings show a relatively low rate of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the Ethiopian population. The major drivers of hesitancy, lack of interest, fear of side-effects, and lack of trust in the vaccine, may be reversed by disseminating accurate and timely information using credible sources across communities.

Mental wellbeing during the time of COVID-19 pandemic: A national pilot survey in Ethiopia.

Introduction: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic substantially disrupts population health and wellbeing globally, while little is known about the effect on mental wellbeing in developing countries. This study aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on mental wellbeing of individuals and households in Ethiopia. Methods: A cross-sectional, national pilot survey was conducted through phone interviews from September to November 2021. Mental wellbeing and disability were assessed using a questionnaire adapted from the 5-item World Health Organization Wellbeing Index (WHO-5), the Oslo Social Support Scale (OSSS-3), and the WHO Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS 2.0). Results: A total of 614 adults completed the pilot survey. The mean age was 36 years (standard deviation 11) and 71.7% were male. Mental wellbeing was poor in 218 (35.5%) participants. The most important predictors for poor mental wellbeing were rural residence (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.89; 95% CI 1.14, 3.14; p=0.012), perceived COVID-19 risk (AOR 1.75; 95% CI 1.18, 2.60; p=0.005), household stress (AOR 2.09; 95% CI 1.31, 3.34; p=0.002), experience of symptom of COVID-19 in the household (AOR 2.14; 95% CI 1.13, 4.04; p=0.019), and poor social support (AOR 2.43; 95% CI 1.51, 3.91; p<0.001). Conclusion: The study provides evidence that COVID-19 had a significant adverse impact on the mental wellbeing of individuals and households in Ethiopia. Further studies are needed to understand in detail the implications of the pandemic and interventions needed to keep mental wellbing of citizens.

Adherence to COVID -19 protective practices in Ethiopia: Use and predictors of face mask-wearing.

Introduction: The Ethiopian Ministry of Health strongly recommends that anyone, regardless of vaccination status, wears a standard face mask consistently when in public. This study aimed to assess the self-reported use and predictors of wearing face masks in the general population in Ethiopia. Methods: This was a population-based cross-sectional study using a telephone survey. Adults living in Ethiopia were randomly selected from the Ethio Telecom list of mobile phone numbers and interviewed about their mask-wearing practice and individual and household-level factors that could impact on the use of face masking. Multivariable logistic regression was used to measure associations. Results: A total of 614 participants were interviewed from September to November 2021. The prevalence of self-reported face mask use when in public was 81.1%. Living outside Addis Ababa, including Oromia [adjusted odds ratio [(AOR) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.14, 0.63)], Amhara [AOR 0.11, 95% CI (0.05, 0.23)], and Southern Nations, Nationalities and People's Region [AOR 0.31, 95% CI (0.12-0.79)] and being divorced or widowed [AOR 0.18, 95% CI (0.06, 0.62)] were found to be inversely associated with face mask use. Female gender [AOR 1.91, 95% CI (1.02, 3.58)] and older age [age ≥ 50, AOR 2.96, 95% CI (1.09-7.97)] were positively associated with the use of face masks. Attending social events [AOR 0.51, 95% CI (0.31-0.82)], was negatively associated with the use of face masks. Conclusion: Self-reported use of face masks was relatively high nationally, but inconsistent among different regions and demographics. The findings imply that policies and messaging campaigns may need to focus on specific populations and behaviors in this ongoing pandemic.

Correction to: Task sharing for the care of severe mental disorders in a low-income country (TaSCS): study protocol for a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Task sharing for the care of severe mental disorders in a low-income country (TaSCS): study protocol for a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Task sharing mental health care through integration into primary health care (PHC) is advocated as a means of narrowing the treatment gap for mental disorders in low-income countries. However, the effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility and sustainability of this service model for people with a severe mental disorder (SMD) have not been evaluated in a low-income country. METHODS/DESIGN: A randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial will be carried out in a predominantly rural area of Ethiopia. A sample of 324 people with SMD (diagnoses of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder) with an ongoing need for mental health care will be recruited from 1) participants in a population-based cohort study and 2) people attending a psychiatric nurse-led out-patient clinic. The intervention is a task-sharing model of locally delivered mental health care for people with SMD integrated into PHC delivered over 18 months. Participants in the active control arm will receive the established and effective model of specialist mental health care delivered by psychiatric nurses at an out-patient clinic within a centrally located general hospital. The hypothesis is that people with SMD who receive mental health care integrated into PHC will have a non-inferior clinical outcome, defined as a mean symptom score on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, expanded version, of no more than six points higher, compared to participants who receive the psychiatric nurse-led service, after 12 months. The primary outcome is change in symptom severity. Secondary outcomes are functional status, relapse, service use costs, service satisfaction, drop-out and medication adherence, nutritional status, physical health care, quality of care, medication side effects, stigma, adverse events and cost-effectiveness. Sustainability and cost-effectiveness will be further evaluated at 18 months. Randomisation will be stratified by health centre catchment area using random permuted blocks. The outcome assessors and investigators will be masked to allocation status. DISCUSSION: Evidence about the effectiveness of task sharing mental health care for people with SMD in a rural, low-income African country will inform the World Health Organisation's mental health Gap Action Programme to scale-up mental health care globally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02308956 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Date of registration: 3 December 2014.