Feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of a community-based group psychosocial support model for conflict survivors in Colombia: An assessment of in-person and remote intervention modalities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Community-based psychosocial support (CB-PSS) interventions utilizing task sharing and varied (in-person, remote) modalities are essential strategies to meet mental health needs, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, knowledge gaps remain regarding feasibility and effectiveness. Methods: This study assesses feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of a CB-PSS intervention for conflict-affected adults in Colombia through parallel randomized controlled trials, one delivered in-person (n = 165) and the other remotely (n = 103), implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic and national protests. Interventions were facilitated by nonspecialist community members and consisted of eight problem-solving and expressive group sessions. Findings: Attendance was moderate and fidelity was high in both modalities. Participants in both modalities reported high levels of satisfaction, with in-person participants reporting increased comfort expressing emotions and more positive experiences with research protocols. Symptoms of depression, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder improved among in-person participants, but there were no significant changes for remote participants in comparison to waitlist controls. Implications: This CB-PSS intervention appears feasible and acceptable in both in-person and remote modalities and associated with reduction in some forms of distress when conducted in-person but not when conducted remotely. Methodological limitations and potential explanations and areas for future research are discussed, drawing from related studies.

Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing a Community-Based Psychosocial Support Intervention Conducted In-Person and Remotely: A Qualitative Study in Quibdó, Colombia.

Community-based psychosocial support group (CB-PSS) interventions using task-shifting approaches are well suited to provide culturally appropriate services in low- and middle-income countries. However, contextual barriers and facilitators must be considered to tailor interventions effectively, particularly considering the challenges introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore the barriers, facilitators, and psychosocial changes associated with implementing a CB-PSS group intervention delivered by local lay providers to conflict-affected adults in Quibdó, Colombia, using both in-person and remote modalities. Data were analyzed from 25 individual interviews with participants and a focus group discussion involving staff members, including 7 community psychosocial agent facilitators and 2 mental health professional supervisors. The analysis used a thematic approach grounded in a descriptive phenomenology to explore the lived experiences of participants and staff members during implementation. Participant attendance in the in-person modality was compromised by factors such as competing work and family responsibilities and disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants in the remote modality faced challenges concerning unstable Internet connectivity, recurrent power outages caused by heavy rain, distractions, interruptions, and threats to confidentiality by family and coworkers. Despite these challenges, data revealed key contextual facilitators, including the community-based knowledge of facilitators and integration of traditional practices, such as the comadreo (informal talks and gatherings). Respondents shared that the CB-PSS groups promoted stronger community relationships and created opportunities for participants to exchange peer support, practice leadership skills, develop problem-solving skills based on peers' experiences, and enhance emotional regulation skills. Differences and similarities across in-person and remote modalities are discussed, as are key considerations for practitioners and policymakers.

Piloting a community-based psychosocial group intervention designed to reduce distress among conflict-affected adults in Colombia: a mixed-method study of remote, hybrid, and in-person modalities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Community members in Quibdó (Choco, Colombia) are highly vulnerable to psychosocial problems associated with the internal armed conflict, poverty, and insufficient public services, and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A pilot study was conducted with conflict-affected adults in Quibdó to assess feasibility and outcomes of a community-based psychosocial support group intervention using three different intervention modalities: in-person, remote (conducted online), and hybrid (half of sessions in-person, half-remote). This group model integrated problem-solving and culturally based expressive activities and was facilitated by local community members with supervision by mental health professionals. METHODS: This study utilized a mixed-explanatory sequential design (a quantitative phase deriving in a qualitative phase) with 39 participants and 8 staff members. Participants completed quantitative interviews before and after an eight-week group intervention. A subset of 17 participants also completed in-depth qualitative interviews and a focus group discussion was conducted with staff at post-intervention. RESULTS: From pre- to post-intervention, participants in all modalities demonstrated improved wellbeing and reduced symptoms of generalized distress, anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress. Use of coping skills varied across modalities, with remote groups associated with a decrease in some forms of coping, including use of social support. In qualitative interviews and the focus group discussion, participants and staff described logistical challenges and successes, as well as facilitators of change such as problem resolution, emotional regulation and social support with variations across modalities, such that remote groups provided fewer opportunities for social support and cohesion. CONCLUSIONS: Results offer preliminary evidence that this model can address psychosocial difficulties across the three modalities, while also identifying potential risks and challenges, therefore providing useful guidance for service delivery in conflict-affected settings during the COVID-19 pandemic and other challenging contexts. Implications of this study for subsequent implementation of a Randomized Control Trial (RCT) are discussed.

Effects of a Contextual Adaptation of the Unified Protocol in Multiple Emotional Disorders in Individuals Exposed to Armed Conflict in Colombia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A transdiagnostic treatment, the Unified Protocol, is as effective as single diagnostic protocols in comorbid emotional disorders in clinical populations. However, its effects on posttraumatic stress disorder and other emotional disorders in individuals living in war and armed conflict contexts have not been studied. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a cultural and contextual adaptation of the Unified Protocol (CXA-UP) on posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression compared to waitlist control in individuals exposed to armed conflict in Colombia. Design, Setting, and Participants: From April 2017 to March 2020, 200 participants 18 years and older were randomly assigned to the CXA-UP or to a waitlist condition. CXA-UP consisted of 12 to 14 twice-a-week or weekly individual 90-minute face-to-face sessions. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, posttreatment, and 3 months following treatment. Analyses were performed and compared for all randomly allocated participants (intent-to-treat [ITT]) and for participants who completed all sessions and posttreatment measures (per protocol [PP]). The study took place at an outpatient university center and included individuals who were registered in the Colombian Victims Unit meeting DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, or depression or were severely impaired by anxiety or depression. Individuals who were receiving psychological therapy, were dependent on alcohol or drugs, were actively suicidal or had attempted suicide in the previous 2 months, had psychosis or bipolar disorder, or were cognitively impaired were excluded. Intervention: CXA-UP or waitlist. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were changes in anxiety, depression, and somatic scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5. Results: Among the 200 participants (160 women [80.0%]; 40 men [20.0%]; mean [SD] age, 43.1 [11.9] years), 120 were randomized to treatment and 80 to waitlist. Results for primary outcomes in the ITT analysis showed a significant pretreatment-to-posttreatment reduction when comparing treatment and waitlist on the posttraumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5 scores (slope [SE], -31.12 [3.00]; P < .001; Cohen d, 0.90; 90% CI, 0.63-1.19), 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) (slope [SE],-11.94 [1.30]; P < .001; Cohen d, 0.77; 90% CI, 0.52-1.06), PHQ-anxiety (slope [SE], -6.52 [0.67]; P < .001; Cohen d, 0.82; 90% CI, 0.49-1.15), and PHQ-somatic (slope [SE], -8.31 [0.92]; P < .001; Cohen d, 0.75; 90% CI, 0.47-1.04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, significant reductions and large effect sizes in all measures of different emotional disorders showed efficacy of a single transdiagnostic intervention in individuals exposed to armed conflicts. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03127982.