The prevalence of mental health disorders and suicide amongst agricultural producers is a global problem. Community leaders, researchers, policymakers, and clinicians have mobilized to develop programs to address this issue. This study reviewed a wide range of mental health interventions targeting farmer mental health spanning over 50 years and examined their reported effectiveness and constraints. A total of ninety-two articles on farmer mental health were included in a final systematic review. Most articles were written concerning mental health literacy and peer and paraprofessional support interventions in the United States and Australia. Among the 56 studies reporting empirical evaluative data, 21 were mixed-method, 20 quantitative, 11 qualitative, and 5 literature synthesis. Non-experimental, self-reported, and qualitative data suggest efficacy of mental health literacy programs, peer and paraprofessional support, and community-based and agroecological interventions. However, most interventions were not subject to rigorous evaluation and only one intervention was evaluated using a control condition. The heterogeneity of existing studies and paucity of rigorous evaluation proscribes firm conclusions related to program-type efficacy. This review demonstrates that there is still a need for a stronger and broader evidence base in the field of farmer mental health interventions, which should focus on both holistic, multi-component programs and targeted approaches.

Opioid use remains a significant public health crisis. However, few quantitative or qualitative data exist on the prevalence of opioid use and associated mental health conditions in agricultural industries and how it affects the industries themselves. Data on opioid use and associated consequences were collected among agricultural business owners and workers using both quantitative (n = 129) and qualitative assessment (n = 7). The prevalence of opioid use, pain, stress, and depressive symptoms as well as associated hazards were characterized among individuals who work in horticulture (nursery and landscape) and those who work in food production (livestock and crops). Qualitative interviews were also conducted to better understand individual experiences with opioid use. Opioid use was significantly higher among horticultural industries compared to food production. Pain and depressive scores were higher among those who had used opioids although stress did not differ. Importantly, substantial percentages of participants who reported opioid use also reported consequences associated with their use, including missing work, being injured at work while using, and having difficulty in completing daily tasks. These results provide initial evidence that opioid use is substantially affecting agricultural industries in terms of mental health, personal health, labor availability, and productivity.