Mental Health Interventions in Juvenile Detention Institutions: A Systematic Review of What Works

Background: Incarcerated adolescents within the juvenile justice system are more likely to be diagnosed with poor mental health compared with their non-incarcerated peers. Conducting clinical trials on mental health interventions among an incarcerated adolescent population is challenging due to the nature of detention facilities. Objectives: This systematic review examines available literature on Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT) done to assess mental health interventions among incarcerated adolescents globally and to determine the type of intervention that would best work in this setting. In this study, a systematic review was conducted to search, identify, and recommend effective interventions best suited to preserve and improve the mental wellbeing of incarcerated adolescents within the detention institution setting. Method: The search was performed in Medline via Ovid, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to retrieve related publications released between 1970 and March 2021. The principal inclusion criteria were RCT articles issued in English that reported any mental health interventions performed in juvenile detention centers involving delinquent adolescents aged 10 to 19 years old. Results: The search discovered 10 related articles that fulfilled the required inclusion criteria. In total, there were seven different types of mental health interventions used in all the studies. The three major themes identified among the selected studies are the interventions for coping strategies, risky behavior, and attention disorder among incarcerated adolescents. The efficacy of the interventions was dependent on the level of intelligence, duration of incarceration, risk of treatment diffusion, and depression symptoms among incarcerated adolescents. Conclusions: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention that is simple, brief, unique, and targets depressive symptoms, has the potential to be most efficacious in improving mental health among incarcerated adolescents.

Download Full-text

Psychological and social interventions for mental health issues and disorders in Southeast Asia: a systematic review

International Journal of Mental Health Systems ◽

10.1186/s13033-021-00482-y ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Alan Maddock ◽

Carolyn Blair ◽

Nil Ean ◽

Paul Best

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Southeast Asia ◽

Southeast Asian ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Health Issues ◽

Social Interventions ◽

Mental Health Issues ◽

Mental Health Interventions

Abstract Background Mental health issues and disorders are major public health challenges, particularly in low- and middle-income countries in Southeast Asia, where chronic shortages in mental health services and human resources exist. The development of effective and accessible mental health systems in Southeast Asia will require evidence based psychological and social interventions. This systematic review provides a narrative synthesis of the evidence on the effectiveness of such interventions for mental health issues and disorders in Southeast Asia. Methods A comprehensive literature search of 7 electronic databases (PsycINFO, Medline (Ovid), Cochrane library, EMBASE, SCOPUS, APA PsycArticles, and Social Care Online) was undertaken. Results Thirty two studies employing RCT designs to evaluate the effectiveness of a range of psychological and social mental health interventions on a number of different mental health outcomes were included in this review. The disparate intervention programmes reviewed were categorised as: lay delivered, yoga, aerobic and/or meditation based, cognitive behavioural therapy oriented, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing based (EMDR), health worker delivered, and hybrid programmes. The majority of the studies included in this review were of low to moderate quality due to the variability in the quality of the study design. The highest quality, and most promising evidence came from the evaluations of lay delivered interventions. This evidence demonstrates the feasibility and potential sustainability of implementing such interventions in resource constrained contexts. Conclusions The review findings indicate that a disparate array of mental health interventions can be implemented effectively in a range of Southeast Asian mental health and health settings. There is a clear need for significantly more research however, through higher quality and larger scale RCTs before it will be known more definitively, if these interventions are effective, and for whom they are most effective in different Southeast Asian contexts.

Download Full-text

Barriers and facilitators to user engagement with digital mental health interventions: A systematic review (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.24387 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Judith Borghouts ◽

Elizabeth Eikey ◽

Gloria Mark ◽

Cinthia De Leon ◽

Stephen M. Schueller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Barriers And Facilitators ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

User Engagement ◽

Mental Health Support ◽

Mental Health Interventions ◽

Health Support ◽

Common Barriers

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions, that deliver mental health support via technologies such as a mobile apps, can increase access to mental health support, and many studies have demonstrated their effectiveness in improving symptoms. However, user engagement, referring to a user’s uptake and sustained interactions with these interventions, varies. OBJECTIVE The aim of this systematic review is to identify common barriers and facilitators influencing user engagement with digital mental health interventions. METHODS A systematic search was conducted of the SCOPUS, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Empirical studies reporting qualitative and/or quantitative data were included. RESULTS 208 articles met the inclusion criteria. Included articles used a variety of methodologies including interviews, surveys, focus groups, workshops, field studies, and analysis of user reviews. Factors extracted for coding were related to the end user, the program/content offered by the intervention, and the technology and implementation environment. Common barriers included severe mental health issues that hampered engagement, technical issues, and a lack of personalization. Common facilitators were social connectedness facilitated by the intervention, increased insight into health, and a feeling of being in control of one’s own health. CONCLUSIONS While previous research suggests that digital mental health interventions can be useful in supporting mental health, contextual factors are important determinants as to whether users actually engage with these interventions. The factors identified in this review can provide guidance when evaluating digital mental health interventions to help explain and understand user engagement, and can inform the design and development of new digital interventions.

Download Full-text

Implementation of e-mental health interventions for informal caregivers of adults with chronic diseases: a protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review with a qualitative comparative analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035406 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (6) ◽

pp. e035406

Author(s):

Chelsea Coumoundouros ◽

Louise von Essen ◽

Robbert Sanderman ◽

Joanne Woodford

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Comparative Analysis ◽

Informal Caregivers ◽

Qualitative Comparative Analysis ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Care Recipient ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Mental Health Interventions

IntroductionInformal caregivers provide the majority of care to individuals with chronic health conditions, benefiting the care recipient and reducing use of formal care services. However, providing informal care negatively impacts the mental health of many caregivers. E-mental health interventions have emerged as a way to provide accessible mental healthcare to caregivers. Much attention has been given to reviewing the effectiveness and efficacy of such interventions, however, factors related to implementation have received less consideration. Therefore, this mixed-methods systematic review will aim to examine factors associated with the effectiveness and implementation of e-mental health interventions for caregivers.Methods and analysisEligible studies published since 1 January 2007 will be searched for in several electronic databases (CINAHL Plus with Full Text, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science), clinical trial registries and OpenGrey, with all screening steps conducted by two independent reviewers. Studies will be included if they focus on the implementation or effectiveness of e-mental health interventions designed for informal adult caregivers of adults with cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, dementia or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Pragmatic randomised controlled trials quantitatively reporting on caregiver anxiety, depression, psychological distress or stress will be used for a qualitative comparative analysis to identify combinations of conditions that result in effective interventions. Qualitative and quantitative data on implementation of e-mental health interventions for caregivers will be integrated in a thematic synthesis to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. These results will inform future development and implementation planning of e-mental health interventions for caregivers.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this study as no primary data will be collected. Results will be disseminated in the form of a scientific publication and presentations at academic conferences and plain language summaries for various stakeholders.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020155727.

Download Full-text

Meta-analysis and systematic review of teacher-delivered mental health interventions for internalizing disorders in adolescents

Mental Health & Prevention ◽

10.1016/j.mhp.2020.200182 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 19 ◽

pp. 200182

Author(s):

Dr Lucas Shelemy ◽

Dr Kate Harvey ◽

Dr Polly Waite

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Internalizing Disorders ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Mental Health Interventions

Download Full-text

The effectiveness of mental health interventions for adult female survivors of sexual assault: A systematic review

Aggression and Violent Behavior ◽

10.1016/j.avb.2015.06.004 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 25 ◽

pp. 15-25 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Angela M. Parcesepe ◽

Sandra L. Martin ◽

McLean D. Pollock ◽

Claudia García-Moreno

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Sexual Assault ◽

Adult Female ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Female Survivors ◽

Mental Health Interventions

Download Full-text

The Use of Mobile Apps and SMS Messaging as Physical and Mental Health Interventions: Systematic Review

FOCUS The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry ◽

10.1176/appi.focus.16406 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 16 (4) ◽

pp. 456-465 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Amy Leigh Rathbone ◽

Julie Prescott

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Mobile Apps ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Physical And Mental Health ◽

Mental Health Interventions

Download Full-text

Mental health interventions for children in foster care: A systematic review

Children and Youth Services Review ◽

10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.09.002 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 70 ◽

pp. 65-77 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Erin P. Hambrick ◽

Shani Oppenheim-Weller ◽

Amanda M. N'zi ◽

Heather N. Taussig

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Foster Care ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Children In Foster Care ◽

Mental Health Interventions

Download Full-text

The effects of non-clinician guidance on effectiveness and process outcomes of digital mental health interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.36004 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Calista Leung ◽

Julia Pei ◽

Kristen Hudec ◽

Farhud Shams ◽

Richard Munthali ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Psychosocial Support ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Process Outcomes ◽

Mental Health Interventions

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions are increasingly prevalent in the current context of rapidly evolving technology, and research indicates that they yield effectiveness outcomes comparable to in-person treatment. Integrating professionals (i.e. psychologists, physicians) into digital mental health interventions has been common, and the inclusion of guidance within programs can increase adherence to interventions. However, employing professionals to enhance mental health programs may undermine the scalability of digital interventions. Therefore, delegating guidance tasks to paraprofessionals (peer supporters, technicians, lay counsellors, or other non-clinicians) can help reduce costs and increase accessibility. OBJECTIVE This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes of non-clinician guided digital mental health interventions. METHODS Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PSYCInfo) were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2020 examining digital mental health interventions. Three journals focused on digital intervention were also hand searched and grey literature was searched using ProQuest and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2. Data were collected on effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes, and meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and adherence outcomes. Non-clinician guided interventions were compared with treatment as usual, clinician-guided interventions, and unguided interventions. RESULTS Thirteen studies qualified for inclusion. Results indicate that non-clinician guided interventions yielded higher post-treatment effectiveness outcomes when compared to conditions involving control programs (e.g. online psychoeducation, monitored attention control) or waitlist controls (k=7, Hedges g=-0.73 (95% CI -1.08 to -0.38)). There are significant differences between non-clinician guided interventions and unguided interventions as well (k=6, Hedges g=-0.17 (95% CI -0.23 to -0.11)). In addition, non-clinician guided interventions did not differ in effectiveness from clinician-guided interventions (k=3, Hedges g=0.08 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.17)). These results suggest that guided digital mental health interventions are helpful to improve mental health outcomes regardless of the qualification, and that the presence of a non-clinician guide improves effectiveness outcomes more than no guidance. Non-clinician guided interventions did not yield significantly different effects on adherence outcomes when compared with unguided interventions (k=3, OR 1.58 (95% CI 0.51 to 4.92)), although a general trend of improved adherence was observed within non-clinician guided interventions. CONCLUSIONS Integrating paraprofessionals and non-clinicians appear to improve outcomes of digital mental health interventions, and may also enhance adherence outcomes (though the trend was nonsignificant). Further research should focus on the specific types of tasks these paraprofessionals can successfully provide (i.e. psychosocial support, therapeutic alliance, technical augmentation) and their associated outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL The protocol is preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020191226).

Download Full-text