High quality mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) guidelines are indispensable for policy and practice to address the mental health consequences of disasters. This contribution complements a review that assessed the methodological quality of 13 MHPSS guidelines. We analyzed the content of the four highest-ranking guidelines and explored implications for disaster risk reduction (DRR). A qualitative explorative thematic analysis was conducted. The four guidelines proved largely similar, overlapping or at least complementary in their MHPSS definitions, stated purpose of the guidelines, user and target groups, terminology, and models used. Many recommended MHPSS measures and interventions were found in all of the guidelines and could be assigned to five categories: basic relief, information provision, emotional and social support, practical support, and health care. The guidelines stress the importance of monitoring needs and problems, evaluating the effect of service delivery, deliberate implementation and preparation, and investments in proper conditions and effective coordination across professions, agencies, and sectors. The MHPSS knowledge base embedded in the guidelines is comprehensive, coherent, and sufficiently universal to serve as the “overarching framework” considered missing yet vital for the integration of MHPSS approaches in DRR. Although application contexts differ geographically, this common ground should allow policymakers and practitioners globally to plan, implement, and evaluate MHPSS actions contributing to DRR, ideally together with target groups.
In 2007, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) published its guidelines for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in emergency situations. This was one of the first sets of MHPSS guidelines, developed during the last decades, to aid policymakers and practitioners in the planning and implementation of disaster mental health risk reduction activities. However, the potential merit of MHPSS guidelines for this purpose is poorly understood. The objective of this study is to review available MHPSS guidelines in disaster settings and assess their methodological quality. MHPSS guidelines, frameworks, manuals and toolkits were selected via a systematic literature review as well as a search in the grey literature. A total of 13 MHPSS guidelines were assessed independently by 3–5 raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation–Health Systems (AGREE-HS) instrument. Guideline quality scores varied substantially, ranging between 21.3 and 67.6 (range 0–100, M = 45.4), with four guidelines scoring above midpoint (50). Overall, guidelines scored highest (on a 1–7 scale) on topic (M = 5.3) and recommendations (M = 4.2), while implementability (M = 2.7) is arguably the area where most of the progress is to be made. Ideally, knowledge derived from scientific research aligns with the receptive contexts of policy and practice where risks are identified and mitigated.
Introduction:The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken to contain it, have had a substantial effect on mental health of populations worldwide. Uncertainties about the future and one’s own health, as well as restrictive measures drastically altered people’s lives. To anticipate and mitigate the probable mental health impact, mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions have been recommended and implemented. The objective of this systematic review is to provide an overview of different types of MHPSS interventions and the quality of the scientific evidence in the context of a pandemic.Method:A systematic search of interventions for reducing mental health problems or risks due to the COVID-19 pandemic was performed in November 2021 and repeated for new records in August 2022. APA PsycInfo, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE(R) ALL, EBM Reviews and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for relevant articles. The methodological quality of selected articles was assessed using the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Results:A summary of the content and quality of MHPSS interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic is provided. The interventions could be clustered predominantly into existing MHPSS categories of “Basic aid”, “Information”, “Emotional and social support”, “Practical support” and “Health care”. Nevertheless, the evidence supporting the applicability and the effectiveness of such measures is limited when it comes to the mitigation of mental health problems.Conclusion:The clustered overview of different COVID-19 interventions points at strong similarities with interventions in general evidence-based MHPSS guidelines. However, there is a need to integrate more systematic monitoring, evaluation and research to appraise the applicability and effectiveness of MHPSS measures in future pandemics and other crises.
Introduction:Disasters and humanitarian crises can have a tremendous impact on the mental health and psychosocial well-being of affected populations. Reliable and practical evidence-informed mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) guidelines are indispensable for policy and practice to address the mental health impact. Our objective was to review the quality of available guidelines and to explore similarities and differences in content.Method:The review was conducted in two steps. Firstly, MHPSS guidelines, frameworks, manuals and toolkits were selected via a systematic literature review as well as a search in the grey literature. A total of 13 MHPSS guidelines were assessed independently by 3–5 raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation–Health Systems (AGREE-HS) instrument. Secondly, we analyzed the content of the highest-ranking guidelines.Results:Guideline quality scores varied substantially, ranging between 21.3 and 67.6 (range 0–100, M= 45.4), with four guidelines scoring above midpoint (50). Overall, guidelines scored highest (on a 1–7 scale) on topic (M = 5.3) and recommendations (M = 4.2), while implementability (M = 2.7) is arguably the area where most of the progress is to be made. The four guidelines proved largely similar, overlapping or at least complementary in their MHPSS definitions, stated purpose of the guidelines, user and target groups, terminology, and models used. Many recommended MHPSS measures and interventions were found in all of the guidelines and could be categorized. The guidelines stress the importance of monitoring needs and problems, evaluating the effect of service delivery, deliberate implementation and preparation, and investments in proper conditions and effective coordination across professions, agencies, and sectors.Conclusion:The MHPSS knowledge base embedded in guidelines is rich and contains invaluable content for disaster risk reduction. Although application contexts differ geographically, available guidelines should allow policymakers and practitioners globally to plan, implement, and evaluate MHPSS actions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.