Protocol for an economic evaluation of scalable strategies to improve mental health among perinatal women: non-specialist care delivered via telemedicine vs. specialist care delivered in-person.

BACKGROUND: Perinatal depression affects an estimated 1 in 5 women in North America during the perinatal period, with annualized lifetime costs estimated at $20.6 billion CAD in Canada and over $45.9 billion USD in the US. Access to psychological treatments remains limited for most perinatal women suffering from depression and anxiety. Some barriers to effective care can be addressed through task-sharing to non-specialist providers and through telemedicine platforms. The cost-effectiveness of these strategies compared to traditional specialist and in-person models remains unknown. This protocol describes an economic evaluation of non-specialist providers and telemedicine, in comparison to specialist providers and in-person sessions within the ongoing Scaling Up Maternal Mental healthcare by Increasing access to Treatment (SUMMIT) trial. METHODS: The economic evaluation will be undertaken alongside the SUMMIT trial. SUMMIT is a pragmatic, randomized, non-inferiority trial across five North American study sites (N = 1,226) of the comparable effectiveness of two types of providers (specialist vs. non-specialist) and delivery modes (telemedicine vs. in-person) of a behavioural activation treatment for perinatal depressive and anxiety symptoms. The primary economic evaluation will be a cost-utility analysis. The outcome will be the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which will be expressed as the additional cost required to achieve an additional quality-adjusted life-year, as assessed by the EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level instrument. A secondary cost-effectiveness analysis will use participants' depressive symptom scores. A micro-costing analysis will be conducted to estimate the resources/costs required to implement and sustain the interventions; healthcare resource utilization will be captured via self-report. Data will be pooled and analysed using uniform price and utility weights to determine cost-utility across all trial sites. Secondary country-specific cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses will also be completed. Sensitivity analyses will be conducted, and cost-effectiveness acceptability-curves will be generated, in all instances. DISCUSSION: Results of this study are expected to inform key decisions related to dissemination and scale up of evidence-based psychological interventions in Canada, the US, and possibly worldwide. There is potential impact on real-world practice by informing decision makers of the long-term savings to the larger healthcare setting in services to support perinatal women with common mental health conditions.

Examining the gaps in perinatal mental health care: A qualitative study of the perceptions of perinatal service providers in Canada.

In Canada, access to perinatal mental health services is disparate across districts, regions, provinces, and territories. Questions remain as to how gaps in service are being experienced by Canadian service providers and clinicians. This paper examines three key questions: 1) What are the experiences of care providers with respect to the screening, identifying, and managing perinatal mental health disorders? 2) What gaps in perinatal mental health care have been identified? and 3) What approaches have been taken by providers, communities, and regions in addressing the needs of their populations? To address these questions, 435 participants from across Canada were surveyed using an online survey constructed by the research members of the CPMHC. A qualitative analysis of the data revealed three key themes: groups marginalized by the current perinatal mental health system, gaps and supports identified by communities; and systemic and policy issues. From these three themes we have identified the key components of changes required in the national approach to perinatal mental health disorders. We identify key resources that could be utilized to create policy change and provide recommendations for change.

Assessment of Canadian perinatal mental health services from the provider perspective: Where can we improve?

Purpose: Perinatal mental health disorders are common, and rates have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is unclear where providers may improve perinatal mental health care, particularly in countries lacking national guidelines, such as Canada. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of perinatal health providers was conducted to describe the landscape of perinatal mental health knowledge, screening, and treatment practices across Canada. Providers were recruited through listservs, social media, and snowball sampling. Participants completed an online survey that assessed their perinatal mental health training, service provision types, their patient wait times, and treatment barriers, and COVID-19 pandemic-related impacts. Results: A total of 435 providers completed the survey, including physicians, midwives, psychologists, social workers, nurses, and allied non-mental health professionals. Most (87.0%) did not have workplace mandated screening for perinatal mental illness but a third (66%) use a validated screening tool. Many (42%) providers stated their patients needed to wait more than 2 months for services. More than half (57.3%) reported they did not receive or were unsure if they received specialized training in perinatal mental health. Most (87.0%) indicated there were cultural, linguistic, and financial barriers to accessing services. Over two-thirds (69.0%) reported the COVID-19 pandemic reduced access to services. Conclusion: Survey findings reveal significant gaps in training, screening tool use, and timely and culturally safe treatment of perinatal mental health concerns. There is critical need for coordinated and nationally mandated perinatal mental health services in Canada to improve care for pregnant and postpartum people.