Examining implementation of an intervention to reduce psychological distress and intimate partner violence in a refugee camp setting

An integrated approach to reduce intimate partner violence and improve mental health in humanitarian settings requires coordination across health and protection services. We developed and tested the Nguvu intervention, which combined evidence-based interventions for psychological distress and intimate partner violence among Congolese refugee women in Nyarugusu refugee camp (Tanzania). We conducted 29 semi-structured interviews with Nguvu participants and stakeholders to explore the relevance, acceptability, feasibility, and impact of this intervention. Participants reported that the intervention aligned with needs and filled a gap in programming, yet further adaptations may improve the fit of the intervention. The Nguvu intervention was acceptable to participants, including group discussion of sensitive topics. Confidentiality was highly regarded among staff and participants, which improved safety and acceptability. It was feasible to train non-specialist refugee workers to deliver the intervention with adequate supervision. Facilitators noted contextual challenges that made it difficult to implement the intervention: limited infrastructure, competing priorities, and population mobility. The intervention was perceived to improve awareness of the association between violence and mental health, reduce self-blame, and build skills to improve wellbeing. Recommended adaptations reveal promising, yet challenging future directions for addressing social determinants of mental health and implementing multi-sectoral programmes in complex humanitarian settings

Multilevel determinants of integrated service delivery for intimate partner violence and mental health in humanitarian settings

Inter-agency guidelines recommend that survivors of intimate partner violence in humanitarian settings receive multisectoral services consistent with a survivor-centered approach. Providing integrated services across sectors is challenging, and aspirations often fall short in practice. In this study, we explore factors that influence the implementation of a multisectoral, integrated intervention intended to reduce psychological distress and intimate partner violence in Nyarugusu Refugee Camp, Tanzania. We analyzed data from a desk review of donor, legal, and policy documents; a gender-based violence services mapping conducted through 15 interviews and 6 focus group discussions; and a qualitative process evaluation with 29 stakeholders involved in the implementation of the integrated psychosocial program. We identified the challenges of implementing a multisectoral, integrated intervention for refugee survivors of intimate partner violence at the structural, inter-institutional, intra-institutional, and in social and interpersonal levels. Key determinants of successful implementation included the legal context, financing, inter-agency coordination, engagement and ownership, and the ability to manage competing priorities. Implementing a multisectoral, integrated response for survivors of intimate partner violence is complex and influenced by interrelated factors from policy and financing to institutional and stakeholder engagement. Further investment in identifying strategies to overcome the existing challenges of implementing multisectoral approaches that align with global guidelines is needed to effectively address the burden of intimate partner violence in humanitarian settings

Evaluation of an integrated intervention to reduce psychological distress and intimate partner violence in refugees:Results from the Nguvu cluster randomized feasibility trial

IntroductionThe complex relationship between intimate partner violence and psychological distress warrants an integrated intervention approach. In this study we examined the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of evaluating a multi-sectoral integrated violence- and mental health-focused intervention (Nguvu).MethodsWe enrolled 311 Congolese refugee women from Nyarugusu refugee camp in Tanzania with past-year intimate partner violence and elevated psychological distress in a feasibility cluster randomized trial. Women were recruited from local women's groups that were randomized to the Nguvu intervention or usual care. Participants from women's groups randomized to Nguvu received 8 weekly sessions delivered by lay refugee incentive workers. Psychological distress, intimate partner violence, other wellbeing, and process indicators were assessed at baseline and 9-weeks post-enrollment to evaluate relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of implementing and evaluating Nguvu in refugee contexts.ResultsWe found that Nguvu was relevant to the needs of refugee women affected by intimate partner violence. We found reductions in some indicators of psychological distress, but did not identify sizeable changes in partner violence over time. Overall, we found that Nguvu was acceptable and feasible. However, challenges to the research protocol included baseline imbalances between study conditions, differential intervention completion related to intimate partner violence histories, differences between Nguvu groups and facilitators, and some indication that Nguvu may be less beneficial for participants with more severe intimate partner violence profiles.ConclusionsWe found evidence supporting the relevance of Nguvu to refugee women affected by partner violence and psychological distress and moderate evidence supporting the acceptability and feasibility of evaluating and implementing this intervention in a complex refugee setting. A definitive cluster randomized trial requires further adaptations for recruitment and eligibility screening, randomization, and retention.Trial registrationISRCTN65771265, June 27, 2016

Evaluating the feasibility of a group psychosocial intervention for migrant and host community women in Ecuador and Panama:protocol for a multi-site feasibility cluster trial

BACKGROUND: Community- and strengths-based psychosocial interventions are central to mental health and psychosocial support guidelines, but rigorous evidence regarding the effectiveness of these interventions is limited. The complexity and variability that is inherent to many community-based psychosocial interventions requires innovative strategies in order to facilitate the comparability and synthesis across research studies without compromising the fit and appropriateness of interventions to specific study populations and context. Entre Nosotras is a community-based psychosocial intervention developed for migrant and host community women that is designed to be flexible enough to enable integration of external intervention components and adaptable to diverse study contexts and populations. This protocol describes a study that aims to evaluate the appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility of integrating a standardized stress management intervention into Entre Nosotras. METHODS: This study will evaluate the appropriateness, acceptability, feasibility, and safety of intervention and research procedures for a cluster randomized comparative effectiveness trial conducted in Ecuador and Panamá with migrant and host community women. In this feasibility trial, we will allocate communities nested within the three study sites to the integrated Entre Nosotras + stress management intervention versus Entre Nosotras alone through stratified randomization. Migrant and host community women residing in these study communities who report low to moderate levels of distress will be allocated to the intervention condition that their community is assigned (n = 220 total). We will collect quantitative measures of psychosocial wellbeing, psychological distress, coping, social support, and functioning from study participants. We will collect quantitative measures of fidelity and facilitator competencies through observation and facilitator self-assessment. Data on appropriateness, acceptability, feasibility, and safety will be gathered from participants and facilitators through quantitative assessments at 0, 5, and 10 weeks post-enrollment and qualitative interviews conducted with all facilitators and a subset of 70 study participants during the post-intervention follow-up period. DISCUSSION: Results from this feasibility trial will determine whether a multi-site cluster randomized comparative effectiveness trial of an adaptable community-based psychosocial intervention for migrant and host community women is relevant, acceptable, and feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05130944. Registered November 23, 2021—retrospectively registered

Protocol for a Randomized Hybrid Type 2 Trial on the Implementation of Group Problem Management Plus (PM+) for Venezuelan Women Refugees and Migrants in Colombia

Background: Task-sharing interventions have shown to be feasible and effective in reducing symptoms of psychological distress. Research is currently needed on how task-shared interventions can be sustained with less-intensive technical support from mental health providers, often available in controlled research trials. This study protocol aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Group Problem Management Plus (PM+) and the adoption, fidelity and maintenance of the intervention when delivered and supervised by nonspecialists. Methods: This study utilises a type-2 hybrid implementation design to compare participant-level outcomes when the intervention is delivered by nonspecialists who receive technical support by psychologists versus nonspecialised support by lay providers. Venezuelan and Colombian women in Barranquilla, Colombia reporting moderate levels of distress will be randomised (N= 128 total) to receive PM+ delivered by nonspecialists who receive training and supervision by a: 1) psychologist; or 2) nonspecialist. Psychosocial wellbeing, general distress and functioning will be measured at baseline, 1-week and 3-months post intervention. A process evaluation will be guided by the RE-AIM framework. Discussion: Results will determine if Group PM+ is feasible and effective to implement in lower resource contexts with less-intensive specialised support. This research especially has implications for humanitarian settings with a limited number of mental health providers. Trials Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT0547735