No abstract

The co-occurrence of health burdens in transitioning populations, particularly in specific socioeconomic and cultural contexts, calls for conceptual frameworks to improve understanding of risk factors, so as to better design and implement prevention and intervention programmes to address comorbidities. The concept of a syndemic, developed by medical anthropologists, provides such a framework for preventing and treating comorbidities. The term syndemic refers to synergistic health problems that affect the health of a population within the context of persistent social and economic inequalities. Until now, syndemic theory has been applied to comorbid health problems in poor immigrant communities in high-income countries with limited translation, and in low-income or middle-income countries. In this Series paper, we examine the application of syndemic theory to comorbidities and multimorbidities in low-income and middle-income countries. We employ diabetes as an exemplar and discuss its comorbidity with HIV in Kenya, tuberculosis in India, and depression in South Africa. Using a model of syndemics that addresses transactional pathophysiology, socioeconomic conditions, health system structures, and cultural context, we illustrate the different syndemics across these countries and the potential benefit of syndemic care to patients. We conclude with recommendations for research and systems of care to address syndemics in low-income and middle-income country settings.

Three-quarters of the global mental health burden exists in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet the lack of mental health services in resource-poor settings is striking. Task-sharing (also, task-shifting), where mental health care is provided by non-specialists, has been proposed to improve access to mental health care in LMICs. This multi-site qualitative study investigates the acceptability and feasibility of task-sharing mental health care in LMICs by examining perceptions of primary care service providers (physicians, nurses, and community health workers), community members, and service users in one district in each of the five countries participating in the PRogramme for Improving Mental health carE (PRIME): Ethiopia, India, Nepal, South Africa, and Uganda. Thirty-six focus group discussions and 164 in-depth interviews were conducted at the pre-implementation stage between February and October 2012 with the objective of developing district level plans to integrate mental health care into primary care. Perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of task-sharing were evaluated first at the district level in each country through open-coding and then at the cross-country level through a secondary analysis of emergent themes. We found that task-sharing mental health services is perceived to be acceptable and feasible in these LMICs as long as key conditions are met: 1) increased numbers of human resources and better access to medications; 2) ongoing structured supportive supervision at the community and primary care-levels; and 3) adequate training and compensation for health workers involved in task-sharing. Taking into account the socio-cultural context is fundamental for identifying local personnel who can assist in detection of mental illness and facilitate treatment and care as well as training, supervision, and service delivery. By recognizing the systemic challenges and sociocultural nuances that may influence task-sharing mental health care, locally-situated interventions could be more easily planned to provide appropriate and acceptable mental health care in LMICs.

No abstract

Background South Africa's national lockdown introduced serious threats to public mental health in a society where one in three individuals develops a psychiatric disorder during their life. We aimed to evaluate the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic using a mixed-methods design. Methods This longitudinal study drew from a preexisting sample of 957 adults living in Soweto, a major township near Johannesburg. Psychological assessments were administered across two waves between August 2019 and March 2020 and during the first 6 weeks of the lockdown (late March–early May 2020). Interviews on COVID-19 experiences were administered in the second wave. Multiple regression models examined relationships between perceived COVID-19 risk and depression. Results Full data on perceived COVID-19 risk, depression, and covariates were available in 221 adults. In total, 14.5% of adults were at risk for depression. Higher perceived COVID-19 risk predicted greater depressive symptoms (p < 0.001), particularly among adults with histories of childhood trauma, though this effect was marginally significant (p = 0.063). Adults were about two times more likely to experience significant depressive symptoms for every one unit increase in perceived COVID-19 risk (p = 0.021; 95% CI 1.10–3.39). Qualitative data identified potent experiences of anxiety, financial insecurity, fear of infection, and rumination. Conclusions Higher perceived risk of COVID-19 infection is associated with greater depressive symptoms during the first 6 weeks of quarantine. High rates of severe mental illness and low availability of mental healthcare amidst COVID-19 emphasize the need for immediate and accessible psychological resources.