Appraising evidence-based mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) guidelines:PART I: A systematic review on methodological quality using AGREE-HS

In 2007, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) published its guidelines for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in emergency situations. This was one of the first sets of MHPSS guidelines, developed during the last decades, to aid policymakers and practitioners in the planning and implementation of disaster mental health risk reduction activities. However, the potential merit of MHPSS guidelines for this purpose is poorly understood. The objective of this study is to review available MHPSS guidelines in disaster settings and assess their methodological quality. MHPSS guidelines, frameworks, manuals and toolkits were selected via a systematic literature review as well as a search in the grey literature. A total of 13 MHPSS guidelines were assessed independently by 3–5 raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation–Health Systems (AGREE-HS) instrument. Guideline quality scores varied substantially, ranging between 21.3 and 67.6 (range 0–100, M = 45.4), with four guidelines scoring above midpoint (50). Overall, guidelines scored highest (on a 1–7 scale) on topic (M = 5.3) and recommendations (M = 4.2), while implementability (M = 2.7) is arguably the area where most of the progress is to be made. Ideally, knowledge derived from scientific research aligns with the receptive contexts of policy and practice where risks are identified and mitigated

Appraising Evidence-Based Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS) Guidelines—PART II:A Content Analysis with Implications for Disaster Risk Reduction

High quality mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) guidelines are indispensable for policy and practice to address the mental health consequences of disasters. This contribution complements a review that assessed the methodological quality of 13 MHPSS guidelines. We analyzed the content of the four highest-ranking guidelines and explored implications for disaster risk reduction (DRR). A qualitative explorative thematic analysis was conducted. The four guidelines proved largely similar, overlapping or at least complementary in their MHPSS definitions, stated purpose of the guidelines, user and target groups, terminology, and models used. Many recommended MHPSS measures and interventions were found in all of the guidelines and could be assigned to five categories: basic relief, information provision, emotional and social support, practical support, and health care. The guidelines stress the importance of monitoring needs and problems, evaluating the effect of service delivery, deliberate implementation and preparation, and investments in proper conditions and effective coordination across professions, agencies, and sectors. The MHPSS knowledge base embedded in the guidelines is comprehensive, coherent, and sufficiently universal to serve as the “overarching framework” considered missing yet vital for the integration of MHPSS approaches in DRR. Although application contexts differ geographically, this common ground should allow policymakers and practitioners globally to plan, implement, and evaluate MHPSS actions contributing to DRR, ideally together with target groups

Online One-Stop Shop for Disaster Response Services After the MH17 Airplane Crash:An Evaluation Study

Background: A one-stop shop for disaster response services provides a central location for information and advice in an accessible way. Yet little is known about its organization and outcomes. After the MH17 airplane crash, the one-stop shop concept was realized through a digital environment called the Information and Referral Center (IRC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the experiences of users and providers in regard to the IRC and to identify improvement points for future IRCs. Method: Data was collected among affected ones as well as involved organizations, using interviews, focus groups, surveys and online user information. Existing evaluation and quality models were combined to design the study and analyze the data. Results: First, affected ones and a variety of organizations involved were positive about the merits of the IRC. Affected ones indicated they perceived the IRC as a reliable source of information and appreciated the referral possibilities. Second, the feature of the IRC to serve as a community where affected ones could meet, share experiences and support each other was hardly used according to participants. Lastly, tracking evolving psychosocial needs and problems through the IRC was hampered due to difficulty in accessing relevant data. Conclusions: The IRC helped organizations to structure and align their services. Affected ones were positive about its reliability and accessibility. An IRC has to be embedded within the established care structures. Future research could indicate whether an IRC is useful in other event types and population contexts as well

Appraising Evidence-Based Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS) Guidelines—PART I: A Systematic Review on Methodological Quality Using AGREE-HS

In 2007, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) published its guidelines for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in emergency situations. This was one of the first sets of MHPSS guidelines, developed during the last decades, to aid policymakers and practitioners in the planning and implementation of disaster mental health risk reduction activities. However, the potential merit of MHPSS guidelines for this purpose is poorly understood. The objective of this study is to review available MHPSS guidelines in disaster settings and assess their methodological quality. MHPSS guidelines, frameworks, manuals and toolkits were selected via a systematic literature review as well as a search in the grey literature. A total of 13 MHPSS guidelines were assessed independently by 3–5 raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation–Health Systems (AGREE-HS) instrument. Guideline quality scores varied substantially, ranging between 21.3 and 67.6 (range 0–100, M = 45.4), with four guidelines scoring above midpoint (50). Overall, guidelines scored highest (on a 1–7 scale) on topic (M = 5.3) and recommendations (M = 4.2), while implementability (M = 2.7) is arguably the area where most of the progress is to be made. Ideally, knowledge derived from scientific research aligns with the receptive contexts of policy and practice where risks are identified and mitigated

Early psychosocial interventions after disasters, terrorism and other shocking events: is there a gap between norms and practice in Europe?

Background: Internationally, several initiatives exist to describe standards for post-disaster psychosocial care. Objective: This study explored the level of consensus of experts within Europe on a set of recommendations on early psychosocial intervention after shocking events (Dutch guidelines), and to what degree these standards are implemented into mental health care practice. Methods: Two hundred and six (mental) health care professionals filled out a questionnaire to assess the extent to which they consider the guidelines’ scope and recommendations relevant and part of the regular practice in their own country. Forty-five European experts from 24 EU countries discussed the guidelines at an international seminar. Results: The data suggest overall agreement on the standards although many of the recommendations appear not (yet) to be embedded in everyday practice. Conclusions: Although large consensus exists on standards for early psychosocial care, a chasm between norms and practice appears to exist throughout the EU, stressing the general need for investments in guideline development and implementation

Stress at work: Self-monitoring of stressors and resources to support employees

High levels of stress at work may have serious consequences for employee functioning and mental health. By providing employees with an easily accessible instrument to regularly evaluate stressors and resources, employee self-monitoring and guidance to support can be accommodated. We evaluated an online self-monitoring tool Brief Assessment of Stress and Energy (BASE). Through their organization, 139 railway emergency services employees were invited to complete BASE and six wellbeing measures. We assessed BASE in two ways: using multiple regression analysis (N = 102, 73.4%), as well as by telephone follow-up interviews during which experts and respondents evaluated the BASE outcome (N = 67, 65.7%). Explained variances of BASE on the six wellbeing measures ranged between 26.6% and 49.9%. Telephone interviews confirmed the BASE outcome. The results indicate that BASE is associated with several measures of wellbeing and accurately refers respondents to counseling. This study shows that BASE is a promising instrument to encourage employees to self-monitor stressors and resources and identify those who need counseling

Appraising evidence-based mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) guidelines: PART I: A systematic review on methodological quality using AGREE-HS

In 2007, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) published its guidelines for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in emergency situations. This was one of the first sets of MHPSS guidelines, developed during the last decades, to aid policymakers and practitioners in the planning and implementation of disaster mental health risk reduction activities. However, the potential merit of MHPSS guidelines for this purpose is poorly understood. The objective of this study is to review available MHPSS guidelines in disaster settings and assess their methodological quality. MHPSS guidelines, frameworks, manuals and toolkits were selected via a systematic literature review as well as a search in the grey literature. A total of 13 MHPSS guidelines were assessed independently by 3–5 raters using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation–Health Systems (AGREE-HS) instrument. Guideline quality scores varied substantially, ranging between 21.3 and 67.6 (range 0–100, M = 45.4), with four guidelines scoring above midpoint (50). Overall, guidelines scored highest (on a 1–7 scale) on topic (M = 5.3) and recommendations (M = 4.2), while implementability (M = 2.7) is arguably the area where most of the progress is to be made. Ideally, knowledge derived from scientific research aligns with the receptive contexts of policy and practice where risks are identified and mitigated

Assessing Psychological Resilience: Development and Psychometric Properties of the English and Dutch Version of the Resilience Evaluation Scale (RES)

Background: Psychological resilience is a distinct factor that affects mental health outcomes after adversities. This study describes the development, validity and measurement invariance (MI) of a Dutch and English scale on psychological resilience, called the Resilience Evaluation Scale (RES).Methods: Separate online surveys with the Dutch and English version of the RES and hypothesized related measures were distributed in a Dutch- and English-speaking group, both drawn from the general population.Results: Exploratory factor analysis, using data from 522 respondents (n = 296 Dutch, n = 226 English), yielded a two-factor structure for the final 9-item RES. The factors reflected the hypothesized underlying constructs of psychological resilience: self-confidence and self-efficacy. The items and constructs of psychological resilience as measured by the RES were interpreted and conceptualized in the same way by both language groups, with the exception of one item. The RES showed good convergent validity and good internal consistency.Conclusions: The current study establishes sound psychometric properties of a new, brief, and freely available scale on psychological resilience. This study contributes to the identification and measurement of psychological resilience after adversities. The final 9-item RES may serve as a valuable instrument in research and in clinical practice

Family Empowerment (FAME) : study protocol for a pilot implementation and evaluation of a preventive multi-family programme for asylum-seeker families

Background Families applying for asylum have often experienced multiple potentially traumatic events and continue to face stressors during their resettlement. Studies have indicated that traumatic events can negatively impact parenting behaviour and child development. A secondary preventive multi-family intervention programme, called Family Empowerment, was developed. Family Empowerment aims to strengthen parenting skills and prevent exacerbation of emotional problems in asylum-seeker families. This study protocol aims to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and potential effectiveness of Family Empowerment to reduce parental mental health problems and improve family functioning. Methods An uncontrolled pre-test-post-test design will be conducted, using a mixed-methods approach. Approximately 60 families living at asylum centres and family locations with children aged 0–18 will be included. All participants will be invited to take part in seven sessions of Family Empowerment. Measurements take place at baseline, during implementation of Family Empowerment and 1 week post-Family Empowerment. Demographic data, the quality of the parent-child interaction, family functioning, parental symptoms of depression and anxiety, and participants’ feedback on progress and the therapeutic alliance will be assessed. A programme integrity list will be filled out during each session. Semi-structured interviews at baseline and post-Family Empowerment will be used to evaluate Family Empowerment. Discussion This is the first study to provide a pilot implementation and evaluation of Family Empowerment. The current study will inform us on how to improve programme elements and the implementation of Family Empowerment. Limitations are discussed