Alejandra Paniagua-Avila

Background: Collaborative care programs are effective at improving common mental illnesses (CMIs) outcomes in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, their routine implementation within primary care and communities is limited. To enhance implementation outcomes, strategies of evidence-informed interventions should be carefully tailored to context. Here, we conducted a contextual assessment to identify key community and health system factors prior to selecting implementation strategies for the first collaborative care program for Maya Indigenous People living with CMIs in Guatemala. Methods: This multi methods study combined systems thinking and implementation science tools. We used routinely collected administrative data to create behavior-over-time (BOT) graphs showcasing the number of primary care visits for CMIs in 10 municipal health districts (2018-2022). We conducted semi-structured interviews at one municipal health district following the ‘Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model’ (PRISM) framework. Participants (n=20) were Ministry of Health coordinators and providers, community leaders with CMIs, and traditional Maya providers. We conducted rapid matrix-based thematic analysis. Results: BOT graphs showed fluctuations in CMI visits, which participants linked to health system and community factors. For instance, historical advocacy for mental health and the training of primary care workers in mental health had increased the number of CMI visits, while the COVID-19 pandemic suddenly decreased CMI visits in 2020. Overall, less than 1% of primary care visits addressed CMIs, which participants indicated did not meet the large and increasing need for mental health services. Civil war violence, natural disasters and alcohol use have increased the mental health needs of young adults over time. Participants indicated that a collaborative care program could increase CMI visits, if implementation strategies address health system and community factors, such as ensuring access to psychotropic medications, and engaging Maya traditional providers in mental health services. Conclusions: By combining BOT graphs, a systems thinking tool, with PRISM we identified dynamic health system and community factors that may influence the implementation of a collaborative care program for CMIs. This is an example on how to conduct pragmatic contextual assessments with readily accessible administrative data and rapid qualitative methods prior to selecting implementation strategies of evidence-informed interventions.

Introduction Screening, Brief Interventions and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs reduce unhealthy alcohol use among adolescents. However, self-report screening alone may lead to false negatives and low service use, especially in HIV care settings. This study explored the contextual implementation factors and strategies of an alcohol biomarker-augmented SBIRT program for HIV-affected adolescents in Zambia, where alcohol use and HIV prevalence are high. Methods We conducted key informant interviews (n=7) with mental health providers and policymakers and focus groups (n=16 groups; 10-11 participants each) with healthcare providers, adolescents, and caregivers, guided by a case vignette of the biomarker-augmented SBIRT program. Thematic analysis followed the implementation frameworks Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Results Participants perceived the SBIRT program as appropriate for adolescent alcohol use. Key contextual factors included: lack of alcohol treatment programs, community stigma against HIV and alcohol use, and robust implementation infrastructure through HIV healthcare. Strategies to enhance acceptability included making alcohol screening universal to avoid labeling adolescents, privacy and confidentiality during biomarker sampling, and peer-led age-matched counseling at screening. To enhance reach, participants suggested designing the program with attention to gender-specific needs and integrating it into HIV healthcare and alcohol use hotspots (e.g. schools). Conclusions Implementation strategies should be designed to reduce stigma, build trust, engage adolescents across genders, and reach youth through clinical and community channels. Future research should define how to select, train, and evaluate peer counselors and assess the effectiveness of alcohol biomarkers within SBIRT programs in motivating behavior change.

The decolonise global health movement has critically reassessed the field’s historical and political underpinnings, urging researchers to recognise biases and power imbalances through reflexivity and action. Genuine change is seen as the outcome of the researcher’s self-awareness, often leaving the underlying structures of global health—and global mental health (GMH)—in the background. Here, we problematise how expectations around agency and change have been mobilised in discussions around decolonisation, highlighting the gradual and contingent nature of international collaboration in GMH. We present three international research initiatives based in or focused on South America: RedeAmericas, the Platform for Social Research on Mental Health in Latin America and the HEalthcaRe wOrkErS project. Instead of comparing the three initiatives directly we identify and discuss common elements among them that challenge and redefine the boundaries of GMH by leveraging local leadership, creating hybrid expert profiles and implementing principles of equity and epistemic justice. Particular attention is given to the fragmentary translation of these principles into the project’s concrete activities. The interplay of agency and the structural confines of GMH is examined in each initiative, expanding the notion of ‘boundaries’ in the field beyond geographical or institutional demarcations. Using the notion of milieu, we call for a more nuanced understanding of the field as simultaneously shaping and being shaped by the tentative collaborative infrastructures developed by researchers. We advocate for a reconceptualisation of GMH that is as diverse and complex as the issues it seeks to address.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid changes in healthcare delivery in Guatemala’s public primary care settings. A new hypertension program, implemented as part of a type 2 hybrid trial since 2019, exemplifies an implementation effort amidst a changing context in an under-resourced setting. We assessed the implementation of an evidence-based intervention (EBI; protocol-based hypertension treatment) and one of its main implementation strategies (team-based collaborative care), raising implications for health equity and sustainability. We present innovative application of systems thinking visuals. Methods: Conducting a convergent mixed methods analysis, we assessed implementation in response to contextual changes across five Ministry of Health (MoH) districts at the pandemic’s onset. Utilizing quantitative programmatic data and qualitative interviews with stakeholders (n=18; health providers, administrators, study staff), we evaluated dimensions of “Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance,” RE-AIM (Reach, Implementation delivery + adaptations), and “Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model,” PRISM (Organizational perspective on the EBI, Fit, Implementation and sustainability infrastructure) frameworks. We assessed representativeness by comparing participants to census data. To assess implementation delivery, we built behavior-over-time (BOT) graphs with quantitative programmatic data (July 2019–July 2021). To assess adaptations and contextual changes, we performed matrix-based thematic qualitative analysis. We converged quantitative implementation delivery data + qualitative adaptations data in joint displays. Finally, we analyzed qualitative and quantitative results across RE-AIM/PRISM and health districts to identify equity and sustainability considerations. Results: Contextual factors that facilitated program delivery included the perception that the EBI was beneficial, program champions, and staff communication. Key barriers to implementation delivery included competition with other primary care activities and limited implementation infrastructure (e.g., equipment, medications). Contextual changes related to COVID-19 hindered implementation delivery, threatened sustainability, and may have exacerbated inequities. However, adaptations that were planned enhanced implementation delivery and may have supported improved equity and sustainability. Conclusions: Recognition of an EBI’s benefits and program champions are important for supporting initial uptake. The ability to plan adaptations amid rapid contextual changes has potential advantages for sustainability and equitable delivery. Systems thinking tools and mixed methods approaches may shed light on the relations between context, adaptations, and equitable and sustainable implementation. Trial registration: NCT03504124

Refugees and migrants experience an elevated risk for mental health problems and face significant barriers to receiving services. Interpersonal counseling (IPC-3) is a three-session intervention that can be delivered by non-specialists to provide psychological support and facilitate referrals for individuals in need of specialized care. We piloted IPC-3 delivered remotely by eight Venezuelan refugee and migrant women living in Peru. These counselors provided IPC-3 to Venezuelan refugee and migrant clients in Peru (n = 32) who reported psychological distress. Clients completed assessments of mental health symptoms at baseline and one-month post-intervention. A subset of clients (n = 15) and providers (n = 8) completed post-implementation qualitative interviews. Results showed that IPC-3 filled a gap in the system of mental health care for refugees and migrants in Peru. Some adaptations were made to IPC-3 to promote its relevance to the population and context. Non-specialist providers developed the skills and confidence to provide IPC-3 competently. Clients displayed large reductions in symptoms of depression (d = 1.1), anxiety (d = 1.4), post-traumatic stress (d = 1.0), and functional impairment (d = 0.8). Remote delivery of IPC-3 by non-specialists appears to be a feasible, acceptable, and appropriate strategy to address gaps and improve efficiency within the mental health system and warrants testing in a fully powered effectiveness study.

Despite offering free-of-charge COVID-19 vaccines starting July 2021, Guatemala has one of the lowest vaccination rates in Latin America. From 28 September 2021 to 11 April 2022, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of community members, adapting a CDC questionnaire to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine access and hesitancy. Of 233 participants ≥ 12 years, 127 (55%) received ≥1 dose of COVID-19 and 4 (2%) reported prior COVID-19 illness. Persons ≥ 12 years old who were unvaccinated (n = 106) were more likely to be female (73% vs. 41%, p < 0.001) and homemakers (69% vs. 24%, p < 0.01) compared with vaccinated participants (n = 127). Among those ≥18 years, the main reported motivation for vaccination among vaccinated participants was to protect the health of family/friends (101/117, 86%); on the other hand, 40 (55%) unvaccinated persons reported little/no confidence in public health institutions recommending COVID-19 vaccination. Community- and/or home-based vaccination programs, including vaccination of families through the workplace, may better reach female homemakers and reduce inequities and hesitancy.

Despite offering free-of-charge COVID-19 vaccines starting July 2021, Guatemala has one of the lowest vaccination rates in Latin America. During September 28, 2021 to April 11, 2022, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of community members adapting a CDC questionnaire to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine access and hesitancy. Of 233 participants ≥12 years, 127 (55%) received >1 dose of COVID-19 and 4 (2%) reported prior COVID-19 illness. Persons ≥12 years old unvaccinated (n=106) were more likely to be female (73% vs 41%, p<0.001) and homemakers (69% vs 24%, p<0.01) compared with vaccinated participants (n=127). Among those ≥18 years, the main reported motivation for vaccination among vaccinated participants was to protect the health of family/friends (101/117, 86%); 40 (55%) unvaccinated persons reported little/no confidence in public health institutions recommending COVID-19 vaccination. Community- and/or home-based vaccination programs, including vaccination of families through the workplace, may better reach female homemakers and reduce inequities and hesitancy.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid changes in the delivery of care across public primary care settings in rural Guatemala in 2020. In response, a hypertension program implemented within the public primary care system required multiple adaptations, providing an illustrative example of dynamic implementation amidst changing context in an under-resourced setting. This study describes the evolvability of an evidence-based intervention (EBI; protocol-based hypertension treatment) and one of its main implementation strategies (team-based collaborative care) during the COVID-19 pandemic and discusses implications for health equity and sustainability. Methods: This convergent mixed methods analysis assessed implementation across five Ministry of Health districts during the initial phase of the pandemic. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected, analyzed, and integrated, informed by the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation Maintenance) Framework’s extension for sustainability, and its contextual enhancement, PRISM (Pragmatic, Robust, Implementation and Sustainability Model). For RE-AIM, we focused on the “Implementation” domain, operationalizing it qualitatively as continued delivery and adaptations to the EBI and implementation strategy, and quantitatively as the extent of delivery over time. We conducted 18 in-depth interviews with health providers / administrators (n=8) and study staff (n=10) and performed a matrix-based thematic-analysis. Qualitative results informed the selection of quantitative implementation summarized as behavior over time graphs. Quantitative implementation data and illustrative quotes are presented as joint displays. Results: In relation to implementation, several organic adaptations hindered delivery, threatened sustainability, and may have exacerbated health inequities. Planned adaptations enhanced program delivery and may have supported improved equity and sustainability. Salient PRISM factors that influenced implementation included “Organizational perspective of the EBI”, “Fit” and “Implementation and sustainability infrastructure”. Facilitators to continued delivery included the perception that the EBI is beneficial, program champions, and healthcare team organization. Barriers included the perception that the EBI is complicated, competition with other primary care activities, and temporary suspension of services due to COVID-19. Conclusions: Multi-level contextual changes led to numerous adaptations of the EBI and implementation strategy. Systems thinking approaches may shed light on how a program’s sustainability and its equitable delivery are influenced by adaptations over time in response to dynamic, multi-level contextual factors. Trial registration: NCT03504124