The inclusion of mental health in the Sustainable Development Goals represents a global commitment to include mental health among the highest health and development priorities for investment. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), such as South Africa, contemplating mental health system scale-up embedded into wider universal health coverage-related health system transformations, require detailed and locally derived estimates on existing mental health system resources and constraints. The absence of these data has limited scale-up efforts to address the burden of mental disorders in most LMICs. We conducted a national survey to quantify public expenditure on mental health and evaluate the constraints of the South African mental health system. The study found that South Africa’s public mental health expenditure in the 2016/17 financial year was USD615.3 million, representing 5.0% of the total public health budget (provincial range: 2.1–7.7% of provincial health budgets) and USD13.3 per capita uninsured. Inpatient care represented 86% of mental healthcare expenditure, with nearly half of total mental health spending occurring at the psychiatric hospital-level. Almost one-quarter of mental health inpatients are readmitted to hospital within 3 months of a previous discharge, costing the public health system an estimated USD112 million. Crude estimates indicate that only 0.89% and 7.35% of the uninsured population requiring care received some form of public inpatient and outpatient mental healthcare, during the study period. Further, mental health human resource availability, infrastructure and medication supply are significant constraints to the realization of the country’s progressive mental health legislation. For the first time, this study offers a nationally representative reflection of the state of mental health spending and elucidates inefficiencies and constraints emanating from existing mental health investments in South Africa. With this information at hand, the government now has a baseline for which a rational process to planning for system reforms can be initiated.

No abstract

This newly developed and validated module of OneHealth tool can be used, especially within the context of integrated health planning at the national level, to generate contextualised estimates of the resource needs, costs and health impacts of scaled-up mental health service delivery.

Background The extent of catastrophic health expenditure and impoverishment associated with depression in low-and middle-income countries is not known. The aim of this study was to estimate the incidence and intensity of catastrophic out-of-pocket (OOP) health expenditure, level of impoverishment and coping strategies used by households of persons with and without depression in a rural Ethiopian district. Methods A comparative cross-sectional survey was conducted, including 128 households of persons with depression and 129 households without. Depression screening was conducted using the Patient Health Questionnaire, nine item version (PHQ-9). People in the depression group were classified into high and low disability groups based on the median value on the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) polytomous summary score. Health expenditure greater than thresholds of 10 and 25% of total household consumption was used for the primary analyses. The poverty headcount, poverty gap and normalized poverty gap were estimated using retrospective recall of total household expenditure pre- and post-OOP payments for health care. Linear probability model using binreg command in STATA with rr option was used to estimate risk ratio for the occurrence of outcomes among households with and without depression based on level of disability. Results Catastrophic OOP payments at any threshold level for households with depression and high disability were higher than control households. At the 10% threshold level, 24.0% of households of persons with depression and high disability faced catastrophic payments compared with 15.3% for depression and low disability and 12.1% for control households ( p = 0.041). Depression and high disability level was an independent predictor of catastrophic OOP payments: RR 2.1; 95% CI:1.1, 4.6. An estimated 5.8% of households of persons with depression and high disability were pushed into poverty because of paying for health care compared with 3.5% for households of persons with depression and low disability and 2.3% for control households ( p = 0.039). Conclusions Households of people with depression and high disability were more likely to face catastrophic expenditures and impoverishment from OOP payments. Financial protection interventions through prepayment schemes, exemptions and fee waiver strategies need to target households of persons with depression. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7239-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

There is increasing international recognition of the need to build capacity to strengthen mental health systems. This is a fundamental goal of the ‘Emerging mental health systems in low- and middle-income countries’ (Emerald) programme, which is being implemented in six low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda). This paper discusses Emerald's capacity-building approaches and outputs for three target groups in mental health system strengthening: (1) mental health service users and caregivers, (2) service planners and policy-makers, and (3) mental health researchers. When planning the capacity-building activities, the approach taken included a capabilities/skills matrix, needs assessments, a situational analysis, systematic reviews, qualitative interviews and stakeholder meetings, as well as the application of previous theory, evidence and experience. Each of the Emerald LMIC partners was found to have strengths in aspects of mental health system strengthening, which were complementary across the consortium. Furthermore, despite similarities across the countries, capacity-building interventions needed to be tailored to suit the specific needs of individual countries. The capacity-building outputs include three publicly and freely available short courses/workshops in mental health system strengthening for each of the target groups, 27 Masters-level modules (also open access), nine Emerald-linked PhD students, two MSc studentships, mentoring of post-doctoral/mid-level researchers, and ongoing collaboration and dialogue with the three groups. The approach taken by Emerald can provide a potential model for the development of capacity-building activities across the three target groups in LMICs.