Poor governance has been identified as a barrier to effective integration of mental health care in low- and middle-income countries. Governance includes providing the necessary policy and legislative framework to promote and protect the mental health of a population, as well as health system design and quality assurance to ensure optimal policy implementation. The aim of this study was to identify key governance challenges, needs and potential strategies that could facilitate adequate integration of mental health into primary health care settings in low- and middle-income countries. Key informant qualitative interviews were held with 141 participants across six countries participating in the Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries (Emerald) research program: Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa, and Uganda. Data were transcribed (and where necessary, translated into English) and analysed thematically using framework analysis, first at the country level, then synthesized at a cross-country level. While all the countries fared well with respect to strategic vision in the form of the development of national mental health policies, key governance strategies identified to address challenges included: strengthening capacity of managers at sub-national levels to develop and implement integrated plans; strengthening key aspects of the essential health system building blocks to promote responsiveness, efficiency and effectiveness; developing workable mechanisms for inter-sectoral collaboration, as well as community and service user engagement; and developing innovative approaches to improving mental health literacy and stigma reduction. Inadequate financing emerged as the biggest challenge for good governance. In addition to the need for overall good governance of a health care system, this study identifies a number of specific strategies to improve governance for integrated mental health care in low- and middle-income countries.

BackgroundStigma and discrimination against people with mental illness remain barriers to help seeking and full recovery for people in need of mental health services. Yet there is scarce research investigating the experiences of psychiatric stigma on mental health service users in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The aim of this study was therefore to explore the experiences of psychiatric stigma by service users in order to inform interventions to reduce such stigma and discrimination in one LMIC, namely South Africa.MethodsParticipants comprised a total of 77 adults aged above 18 years, made up of service providers including professional nurses (10), lay counsellors (20), auxiliary social workers (2); and service users (45).ResultsPsychiatric stigma was found to be perpetuated by family members, friends, employers, community members and health care providers. Causes of psychiatric stigma identified included misconceptions about mental illness often leading to delays in help-seeking. Experiencing psychiatric stigma was reported to worsen the health of service users and impede their capacity to lead and recover a normal life.ConclusionMedia campaigns and interventions to reduce stigma should be designed to address specific stigmatizing behaviours among specific segments of the population. Counselling of families, caregivers and service users should include how to deal with experienced and internalized stigma.

BackgroundPeople Living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV) face various day-to-day and long-term personal, interpersonal, social, physical and psychological challenges as a result of, and in addition to the health conditions they are susceptible to due to their HIV status. There is a dearth of large-scale research to provide robust prevalence estimates of mental health problems among PLHIV, especially in Nigeria. This study aimed to ascertain the prevalence and factors associated with major depressive episodes, suicidality, and alcohol use disorder among people living with HIV/AIDS in Nigeria.MethodsA survey of 1187 participants aged 18 years and above was conducted within three HIV treatment centres in Abuja, Nigeria. Depression, suicidality, and alcohol use disorder modules of the WHO World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview questionnaire were used for this study. A socio-demographic questionnaire was also used to collect other health and demographic data. Descriptive statistics (frequency distribution, percentage, mean, median, mode, and standard deviation) and regression analyses were conducted to explore associations between mental health problems and demographic and other health-related factors.ResultsTwelve-month prevalence rates were 28.2% for major depressive episodes, 2.9% for suicidal ideation, 2.3% for suicide attempts, 7.8% for harmful alcohol use, 7.0% for alcohol abuse, and 2.2% for alcohol dependence. Major depressive episodes were significantly associated with having planned suicide and marital status. Suicidal ideation was significantly associated with major depressive episodes, marital status, and religion. Females were less likely to be diagnosed with alcohol disorders.ConclusionsSome people living with HIV/AIDS also tend to suffer from depression, suicidality, and alcohol use disorders. These findings highlight the need for the integration of mental health services into HIV/AIDS care in Nigeria.

BackgroundIn low and middle income countries there is evidence to suggest effectiveness of community-based psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia. Many psychosocial interventions have however been conceptualized in high income countries and assessing their feasibility and acceptability in low and middle income countries is pertinent and the objective of this review.MethodsSix databases were searched using search terms (i) “Schizophrenia”; (ii) “Low and middle income or developing countries” and (iii) “Psychosocial interventions”. Abstracts identified were extracted to an EndNote Database. Two authors independently reviewed abstracts according to defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Full papers were accessed of studies meeting these criteria, or for which more information was needed to include or exclude them. Data were extracted from included studies using a predesigned data extraction form. Qualitative synthesis of qualitative and quantitative data was conducted.Results14 037 abstracts were identified through searches. 196 full articles were reviewed with 17 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Little data emerged on feasibility. Barriers to feasibility were noted including low education levels of participants, unavailability of caregivers, and logistical issues such as difficulty in follow up of participants. Evidence of acceptability was noted in high participation rates and levels of satisfaction with interventions.ConclusionsWhile there is preliminary evidence to suggest acceptability of community-based psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia in low and middle income countries, evidence for overall feasibility is currently lacking. Well-designed intervention studies incorporating specific measures of acceptability and feasibility are needed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0400-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundIn addition to services within the health system, interventions at the population and community levels are also important for the promotion of mental health, primary prevention of mental, neurological and substance use (MNS) disorders, identification and case detection of MNS disorders; and to a lesser degree treatment, care and rehabilitation. This study aims to identify “best practice” and “good practice” interventions that can feasibly be delivered at these population- and community-levels in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to aid the identification of resource efficiencies and allocation in LMICs.MethodsA narrative review was conducted given the wide range of relevant interventions. Expert consensus was used to identify “best practice” at the population-level on the basis of existing quasi-experimental natural experiments and cost effectiveness, with small scale emerging and promising evidence comprising “good practice”. At the community-level, using expert consensus, the ACE (Assessing Cost-Effectiveness in Prevention Project) grading system was used to differentiate “best practice” interventions with sufficient evidence from “good practice” interventions with limited but promising evidence.ResultsAt the population-level, laws and regulations to control alcohol demand and restrict access to lethal means of suicide were considered “best practice”. Child protection laws, improved control of neurocysticercosis and mass awareness campaigns were identified as “good practice”. At the community level, socio-emotional learning programmes in schools and parenting programmes during infancy were identified as “best practice”. The following were all identified as “good practice”: Integrating mental health promotion strategies into workplace occupational health and safety policies; mental health information and awareness programmes as well as detection of MNS disorders in schools; early child enrichment/preschool educational programs and parenting programs for children aged 2–14 years; gender equity and/or economic empowerment programs for vulnerable groups; training of gatekeepers to identify people with MNS disorders in the community; and training non-specialist community members at a neighbourhood level to assist with community-based support and rehabilitation of people with mental disorders.ConclusionInterventions provided at the population- and community-levels have an important role to play in promoting mental health, preventing the onset, and protecting those with MNS disorders. The importance of inter-sectoral engagement and the need for further research on interventions at these levels in LMICs is highlighted.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13033-016-0060-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.