Background: Due to their experiences of major stressful life events, including postdisplacement stressors, refugees and asylum seekers are vulnerable to developing mental health problems. Yet, despite the availability of specialized mental health services in Western European host countries, refugees and asylum seekers display low mental healthcare utilization. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore structural and socio-cultural barriers to accessing mental healthcare among Syrian refugees and asylum seekers in Switzerland. Method: In this qualitative study, key-informant (KI) interviews with Syrian refugees and asylum seekers, Swiss healthcare providers and other stakeholders (e.g. refugee coordinators or leaders) were conducted in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. Participants were recruited using snowball sampling. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed, and then analysed using thematic analysis, combining deductive and inductive coding. Results: Findings show that Syrian refugees and asylum seekers face multiple structural and socio-cultural barriers, with socio-cultural barriers being perceived as more pronounced.Syrian key informants, healthcare providers, and other stakeholders identified language, gatekeeper-associated problems, lack of resources, lack of awareness, fear of stigma and a mismatch between the local health system and perceived needs of Syrian refugees and asylum seekers as key barriers to accessing care. Conclusions: The results show that for Syrian refugees and asylum seekers in Switzerland several barriers exist. This is in line with previous findings. A possible solution for the current situation might be to increase the agility of the service system in general and to improve the willingness to embrace innovative paths, rather than adapting mental healthcare services regarding single barriers and needs of a new target population.

Background: More than 120,000 refugees and asylum seekers are currently living in Switzerland. The prevalence of mental disorders among this population is significantly higher than that in the general population. While effective treatment options and cross-cultural, specialized treatment centers exist, they tend to be overloaded by their target populations. General outpatient primary health care providers might be able to compensate for the lack of specialized treatment slots. To date, however, it is unknown how often and under what conditions (e.g., length of waiting lists) refugees and asylum seekers are treated outside of specialized centers and whether there are barriers that prevent providers in outpatient settings from treating more patients in this subgroup. The present study aimed to assess the challenges and barriers faced by psychiatrists and psychotherapists working in outpatient settings in Switzerland in treating refugees and asylum seekers to determine the potential capacity of this group to provide mental health care. Methods: An online survey was conducted during the winter of 2017/2018. The survey was constructed in three official languages and took 10-15 min to complete. Spearman's correlations, Mann-Whitney U-Tests, and Chisquared tests were conducted to analyze the data. Results: Eight hundred and sixty-seven (N = 867) psychotherapists and psychiatrists working in outpatient settings completed the survey: 43% of them reported having treated between 1 and 9 refugees or asylum seekers in the past 12 months, and a further 13% reported treating 10 or more. Interpreters were used for almost every other patient with a refugee or asylum-seeker background. At the same time, the funding of interpreters, as well as the funding of treatment in general, were reported to be the biggest hurdles to treating more refugees and asylum seekers. Conclusions: Given the low number of patients rejected for capacity reasons (between 2 and 5%) and the median waiting times for the admission of new patients ranging between 2 and 3 weeks, outpatient primary mental health care providers might treat more refugees and asylum seekers and relieve specialized treatment centers. However, barriers such as lack of funding of interpreters seem to hinder them. Appropriate steps by the authorities are needed to improve the current situation.

BACKGROUND Refugees and asylum seekers are susceptible to developing common mental disorders due to their exposure to stressful experiences before, during and after their flight. The Syrian Civil War, which started in 2011, has led to a massive number of Syrians seeking refuge and asylum in European countries, including Switzerland. Currently, Syrians are the second-largest refugee and asylum-seeking population in Switzerland. However, very little is known about the problems faced by this new population in Switzerland and their needs relating to mental health services. Identifying the problems faced by this community is crucial to providing adapted and tailored mental health services to Syrian refugees in Switzerland. AIM OF THE STUDY The current study aimed to identify problems that Syrian refugees and asylum seekers face daily while living in Switzerland in order to inform the adaptation of a brief psychological intervention. METHODS We used a cross-sectional, qualitative design and collected data according to The Manual for Design, Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation of Mental Health and Psychosocial Assistance Programs for Trauma Survivors in order to identify problems perceived by the target population. Free-listing, open-ended interviews were conducted with 30 adult Syrian refugees and asylum seekers and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS The results show that besides physical health problems, Syrians experience primarily two types of problems: practical and psychological (emotional) problems. These two types of problems are closely interrelated. The most common practical problems (problems with government and authorities, problems related to residence permits, problems with integration, cultural differences, language problems, problems related to education, problems related to employment, and problems with housing) were reported by almost half of all participants. Symptoms of mental disorders and feelings of uncertainty, frustration and injustice were the most common psychological problems and were mentioned by more than one third of the participants. The finding that almost half of the participants reported typical symptoms of mental health disorders suggests that a considerable number of Syrian refugees and asylum seekers might need mental healthcare. CONCLUSIONS Authorities, practitioners and researchers should recognize that Syrian refugees and asylum seekers are strongly affected by a broad range of problems. Besides practical problems, they suffer a multitude of psychological problems, and a significant number of them report, among other issues, symptoms of mental health disorders. Officials working with this population should be aware of this vulnerability and be prepared to refer clients in need of mental healthcare to mental healthcare providers. Moreover, the significant variety and number of problems experienced by this population should be taken into consideration when developing solutions tailored to their needs.

Background Syrian refugees resettled in Turkey show a high prevalence of symptoms of mental disorders. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is an effective psychological intervention delivered by non-specialist health care providers which has shown to decrease psychological distress among people exposed to adversity. In this single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial, we examined the methodological trial procedures of Group PM+ (gPM+) among Syrian refugees with psychological distress in Istanbul, Turkey, and assessed feasibility, acceptability, perceived impact and the potential cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Methods Refugees with psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K10 > 15) and impaired psychosocial functioning (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS 2.0 > 16) were recruited from the community and randomised to either gPM+ and enhanced care as usual (E-CAU) (n = 24) or E-CAU only (n = 22). gPM+ comprised of five weekly group sessions with eight to ten participants per group. Acceptability and feasibility of the intervention were assessed through semi-structured interviews. The primary outcome at 3-month follow-up was symptoms of depression and anxiety (Hopkins Symptoms Checklist-25). Psychosocial functioning (WHODAS 2.0), symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder and self-identified problems (Psychological Outcomes Profiles, PSYCHLOPS) were included as secondary outcomes. A modified version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory was used to document changes in the costs of health service utilisation as well as productivity losses. Results There were no barriers experienced in recruiting study participants and in randomising them into the respective study arms. Retention in gPM+ was high (75%). Qualitative analyses of the interviews with the participants showed that Syrian refugees had a positive view on the content, implementation and format of gPM+. No adverse events were reported during the implementation. The study was not powered to detect an effect. No significant difference between gPM+ and E-CAU group on primary and secondary outcome measures, or in economic impacts were found. Conclusions gPM+ delivered by non-specialist peer providers seemed to be an acceptable, feasible and safe intervention for Syrian refugees in Turkey with elevated levels of psychological distress. This pilot RCT sets the stage for a fully powered RCT. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03567083; date: 25/06/2018.