Understanding Users' Perspectives of Psychosocial Mechanisms Underpinning Peer Support Work in Chile

Critical Time Intervention - Task-Shifting for Individuals with Psychosis in Latin America: A Multi-stakeholder Qualitative Analysis of Implementation Barriers and Facilitators

This article presents the results of a qualitative study conducted to understand the barriers and facilitators in implementing a pilot trial of Critical Time Intervention-Task-Shifting-a time-limited, community-based, recovery-oriented intervention for individuals with psychosis-in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and Santiago, Chile. Data included 40 semi-structured interviews with service users, task-shifting providers, and administrators. Analysis proceeded in three iterative phases and combined inductive and deductive approaches. Coding frameworks for implementation factors, and whether or not they acted as barriers and facilitators, were developed and refined using many domains and constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Barriers and facilitators were ultimately grouped into five domains: 1-Personal; 2-Interpersonal; 3-Intervention; 4-Mental Health System; and 5-Contextual. A rating system was also developed and applied, which enabled comparisons across stakeholders and study sites. Major facilitators included intervention characteristics such as the roles of the task-shifting providers and community-based care. Top barriers included mental health stigma and community conditions (violence). Nevertheless, the findings suggest that Critical Time Intervention-Task-Shifting is largely acceptable and feasible, and could contribute to efforts to strengthen community mental health systems of care for individuals with psychosis in Latin America, especially in advancing the task-shifting strategy and the recovery-oriented approach.

Peer-led recovery groups for people with psychosis in South Africa (PRIZE): protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

The available care for people with psychosis in South Africa is inadequate to support personal recovery. Group peer support interventions are a promising approach to foster recovery, but little is known about the preferences of service users, or the practical application of this care model, in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). This study aims to assess the acceptability and feasibility of integrating peer-led recovery groups for people with psychosis and their caregivers in South Africa into existing systems of care, and to determine key parameters in preparation for a definitive trial.

METHODS

The study is set in Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan district of the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. The design is an individually randomised parallel group feasibility trial comparing recovery groups in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) with TAU alone in a 1:1 allocation ratio. We aim to recruit 100 isiXhosa-speaking people with psychosis and 100 linked caregivers. TAU comprises anti-psychotic medication-focused outpatient care. The intervention arm will comprise seven recovery groups, including service users and caregiver participants. Recovery groups will be delivered in two phases: a 2-month phase facilitated by an auxiliary social worker, then a 3-month peer-led phase. We will use mixed methods to evaluate the process and outcomes of the study. Intervention acceptability and feasibility (primary outcomes) will be assessed at 5 months post-intervention start using qualitative data collected from service users, caregivers, and auxiliary social workers, along with quantitative process indicators. Facilitator competence will be assessed with the GroupACT observational rating tool. Trial procedures will be assessed, including recruitment and retention rates, contamination, and validity of quantitative outcome measures. To explore potential effectiveness, quantitative outcome data (functioning, unmet needs, personal recovery, internalised stigma, health service use, medication adherence, and caregiver burden) will be collected at baseline, 2 months, and 5 months post-intervention start.

DISCUSSION

This study will contribute to the sparse evidence on the acceptability and feasibility of peer-led and recovery-oriented interventions for people with psychosis in LMIC when integrated into existing care systems. Results from this feasibility trial will inform preparations for a definitive trial and subsequent larger-scale implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Pan-African Clinical Trials Register PACTR202202482587686. Registered on 28 February 2022.  https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=21496 .

Initial adaptation of the OnTrack coordinated specialty care model in Chile: An application of the Dynamic Adaptation Process

Background

In 2005, Chile became the first country in Latin America to guarantee universal free access for the diagnosis and treatment of schizophrenia. A cluster randomized control trial utilizing the Dynamic Adaptation Process framework is underway to adapt and test the OnTrack coordinated specialty care model to provide recovery-oriented, person-centered care by a multidisciplinary team for individuals with first episode psychosis (FEP) in Chile.

Methods

A qualitative formative research study was conducted to inform the initial adaptation of the OnTrack Chile (OTCH) program. We conducted key informant interviews (n = 17) with various stakeholders (policymakers; directors/managers of community mental health centers; mental health professionals) and focus group discussions (n = 6) with individuals with FEP and caregivers (n = 35 focus group participants total). Data was analyzed using thematic analysis, organized by participants' perspectives on the benefits, barriers, and recommendations for the key principles, multidisciplinary team, psychosocial components, and the training and supervision model of OnTrack.

Results

Participants expressed enthusiasm and support for OnTrack's recovery-oriented and person-centered principles of care. While many participants lauded the emphasis on shared decision-making and family involvement, some reported reticence, citing that it is culturally normative for patients and families to adopt a passive role in treatment. Peer specialists, and the family psychoeducation and support and supported education and employment components were perceived as aspects that could encourage the promotion of personhood and autonomy development. However, implementation challenges, including the prevailing biomedical approach, professional hierarchy, and the lack of infrastructure, human, and financial resources necessitate some modifications to these aspects. Some mental health professionals further conveyed reservations regarding the perceived hierarchical structure of the supervision model.

Conclusion

OnTrack represents a shift from a biomedical model to a valued, aspirational, person-centered and culturally responsive model that focuses on recovery, shared decision-making and psychosocial care. With the appropriate governmental and agency-level provision of resources and modifications to some of the program components, particularly regarding the shared decision-making framework, peer specialist, family engagement, and the training supervision model, OTCH could be a transformative program for a more comprehensive, evidence-based care for individuals with FEP in Chile.

A Recovery-Oriented Intervention for People With Psychosis: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This pilot randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of critical time intervention-task shifting (CTI-TS) for people with psychosis in Santiago, Chile, and Rio de Janeiro. CTI-TS is a 9-month intervention involving peer support workers and is designed to maintain treatment effects up to 18 months.

METHODS

A total of 110 people with psychosis were recruited when they enrolled in community mental health clinics (Santiago, N=60; Rio de Janeiro, N=50). Participants within each city were randomly assigned to either CTI-TS or usual care for 9 months. Primary outcomes were quality of life, measured with the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment-Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF), and unmet needs, measured with the Camberwell Assessment of Need (CAN), at 18-month follow-up. Results were analyzed according to intention-to-treat guidelines. Generalized estimating equations, with observations clustered within cities, and multiple imputation for missing data were used.

RESULTS

At 18 months, both groups showed improved primary outcomes. In both unadjusted and fully adjusted analyses, no significant differences between CTI-TS and usual care (WHOQOL-BREF question on quality of life and CAN mean number of unmet needs) were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Three factors might explain the lack of difference between CTI-TS and usual care: first-contact enrollment precluded rapport prior to randomization, a minority of patients were uncomfortable with peers being on the treatment team, and primary outcome measures may not have been sensitive enough to capture the effects of a recovery-oriented intervention. The results have implications for the design of transitional services for people with psychosis, especially in Latin America.