Rapid reviews may produce different results to systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study

Improving mental ill-health with psycho-social group interventions in South Asia-A scoping review using a realist lens

This scoping review aimed to synthesise current evidence related to psycho-social groups as part of community-based mental health interventions in South Asia. We used a realist lens to pay attention to the contexts and mechanisms supporting positive outcomes. We included studies published from January 2007 to February 2022 that: were based in communities in South Asia, included a group component, reported on interventions with a clear psychosocial component, targeted adults and were implemented by lay community health workers. Two reviewers extracted data on intervention components, groups and facilitators, participant demographics and enabling contexts, mechanisms and outcomes. Expert reference panels including people with lived experience of psycho-social disability, mental health professionals and policy makers confirmed the validity and relevance of initial review findings. The review examined 15 interventions represented by 42 papers. Only four interventions were solely psycho-social and nearly all included psychoeducation and economic support. Only 8 of the 46 quantitative outcome measures used were developed in South Asia. In a context of social exclusion and limited autonomy for people with psychosocial disability, psychosocial support groups triggered five key mechanisms. Trusted relationships undergirded all mechanisms, and provided a sense of inclusion, social support and of being able to manage mental distress due to improved skills and knowledge. Over time group members felt a sense of belonging and collective strength meaning they were better able to advocate for their own well-being and address upstream social health determinants. This led to outcomes of improved mental health and social participation across the realms of intrapersonal, interpersonal and community. Psychosocial groups merit greater attention as an active ingredient in community interventions and also as an effective, relevant, acceptable and scalable platform that can promote and increase mental health in communities, through facilitation by lay community health workers.

Rapid evidence synthesis to enable innovation and adoption in health and social care

BACKGROUND

The rapid identification and adoption of effective innovations in healthcare is a known challenge. The strongest evidence base for innovations can be provided by evidence synthesis, but this is frequently a lengthy process and even rapid versions of this can be time-consuming and complex. In the UK, the Accelerated Access Review and Academic Health Science Network (AHSN) have provided the impetus to develop a consistently rapid process to support the identification and adoption of high-value innovations in the English NHS.

METHODS

The Greater Manchester Applied Research Collaboration (ARC-GM) developed a framework for a rapid evidence synthesis (RES) approach, which is highly integrated within the innovation process of the Greater Manchester AHSN and the associated healthcare and research ecosystem. The RES uses evidence synthesis approaches and draws on the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework to provide rapid assessments of the existing evidence and its relevance to specific decision problems. We implemented this in a real-time context of decision-making around adoption of innovative health technologies.

RESULTS

Key stakeholders in the Greater Manchester decision-making process for healthcare innovations have found that our approach is both timely and flexible; it is valued for its combination of rigour and speed. Our RES approach rapidly and systematically identifies, appraises and contextualises relevant evidence, which can then be transparently incorporated into decisions about the wider adoption of innovations. The RES also identifies limitations in existing evidence for innovations and this can inform subsequent evaluations. There is substantial interest from other ARCs and AHSNs in implementing a similar process. We are currently exploring methods to make completed RES publicly available. We are also exploring methods to evaluate the impact of using RES as more implementation decisions are made.

CONCLUSIONS

The RES framework we have implemented combines transparency and consistency with flexibility and rapidity. It therefore maximises utility in a real-time decision-making context for healthcare innovations.