Mental health stigma at primary health care centres in Lebanon: qualitative study

Background: Mental health-related stigma is a global public health concern and a major barrier to seeking care. In this study, we explored the role of stigma as a barrier to scaling up mental health services in primary health care (PHC) centres in Lebanon. We focused on the experiences of Healthcare Providers (HCPs) providing services to patients with mental health conditions (MHCs), the views of policy makers, and the perceptions of stigma or discrimination among individuals with MHCs. This study was conducted as part of INDIGO-PRIMARY, a larger multinational stigma reduction programme. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 45) were carried out with policy makers (n = 3), PHC management (n = 4), PHC staff (n = 24), and service users (SUs) (n = 14) between August 2018 and September 2019. These interviews explored mental health knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of staff, challenges of providing treatment, and patient outcomes. All interviews were coded using NVivo and a thematic coding framework. Results: The results of this study are presented under three themes: (1) stigma at PHC level, (2) stigma outside PHC centres, and (3) structural stigma. SUs did not testify to discrimination from HCPs but did describe stigmatising behaviour from their families. Interestingly, at the PHC level, stigma reporting differed among staff according to a power gradient. Nurses and social workers did not explicitly report incidents of stigma but described patients with MHCs as uncooperative, underscoring their internalized negative views on mental health. General practitioners and directors were more outspoken than nurses regarding the challenges faced with mental health patients. Mental health professionals revealed that HCPs still hold implicitly negative views towards patients with MHCs however their attitude has improved recently. Our analysis highlights five layers of stigma affecting SUs. Conclusion: This qualitative study reveals that stigma was still a key concern that affects patients with MHC. SUs reported experiencing overt stigmatising behaviour in the community but less explicit discrimination in a PHC setting. Our findings emphasise the importance of (1) combatting structural stigma through legal reform, (2) addressing interpersonal stigma, (3) committing PHC management to deliver high quality mental health integrated services, and (4) reducing intrapersonal stigma by building public empathy. Keywords: Mental health Stigma; Primary health care (PHC); Qualitative researc

Protocol for a randomized control trial of the caregiver support intervention with Syrian refugees in Lebanon

Background There is evidence that chronic stress negatively impacts parenting among refugees and other war-affected communities. Persistent parental stress and distress may lead to unresponsive, anxious, or overly harsh parenting and a corresponding increase in emotional and behavior problems among children. Most parenting interventions emphasize the acquisition of knowledge and skills; however, this overlooks the deleterious effects of chronic stress on parenting. The Caregiver Support Intervention (CSI) aims to strengthen quality of parenting skills by lowering stress and improving psychosocial wellbeing among refugee caregivers of children aged 3–12 years, while also increasing knowledge and skills related to positive parenting. The CSI is a nine-session psychosocial group intervention delivered by non-specialist providers. It is intended for all adult primary caregivers of children in high-adversity communities, rather than specifically targeting caregivers already showing signs of elevated distress. Methods/design The primary objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the CSI through a parallel group randomized controlled study with Syrian refugee families in North Lebanon. Participants will be primary caregivers of children aged 3–12 years, with one index child per family. Families will be randomized to the CSI or a waitlist control group. A total of 240 families (480 caregivers) will be recruited into the study. Randomization will be at the family level, and CSI groups will be held separately for women and men. The study will be implemented in two waves. Outcomes for both arms will be assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome is quality of parenting skills. Secondary outcomes include parental warmth and sensitivity, harsh parenting, parenting knowledge, and child psychosocial wellbeing. Putative mediators of the CSI on parenting are caregiver stress, distress, psychosocial wellbeing, and stress management. Discussion This trial may establish the CSI as an effective intervention for strengthening parenting in families living in settings of high adversity, particularly refugee communities. Trial registration International Society for the Registration of Clinical Trials, ISRCTN22321773. Registered on 5 August 201

Mental health stigma at primary health care centres in Lebanon:qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Mental health-related stigma is a global public health concern and a major barrier to seeking care. In this study, we explored the role of stigma as a barrier to scaling up mental health services in primary health care (PHC) centres in Lebanon. We focused on the experiences of Healthcare Providers (HCPs) providing services to patients with mental health conditions (MHCs), the views of policy makers, and the perceptions of stigma or discrimination among individuals with MHCs. This study was conducted as part of INDIGO-PRIMARY, a larger multinational stigma reduction programme. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 45) were carried out with policy makers (n = 3), PHC management (n = 4), PHC staff (n = 24), and service users (SUs) (n = 14) between August 2018 and September 2019. These interviews explored mental health knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of staff, challenges of providing treatment, and patient outcomes. All interviews were coded using NVivo and a thematic coding framework. RESULTS: The results of this study are presented under three themes: (1) stigma at PHC level, (2) stigma outside PHC centres, and (3) structural stigma. SUs did not testify to discrimination from HCPs but did describe stigmatising behaviour from their families. Interestingly, at the PHC level, stigma reporting differed among staff according to a power gradient. Nurses and social workers did not explicitly report incidents of stigma but described patients with MHCs as uncooperative, underscoring their internalized negative views on mental health. General practitioners and directors were more outspoken than nurses regarding the challenges faced with mental health patients. Mental health professionals revealed that HCPs still hold implicitly negative views towards patients with MHCs however their attitude has improved recently. Our analysis highlights five layers of stigma affecting SUs. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study reveals that stigma was still a key concern that affects patients with MHC. SUs reported experiencing overt stigmatising behaviour in the community but less explicit discrimination in a PHC setting. Our findings emphasise the importance of (1) combatting structural stigma through legal reform, (2) addressing interpersonal stigma, (3) committing PHC management to deliver high quality mental health integrated services, and (4) reducing intrapersonal stigma by building public empathy