Internet‐based intervention for postpartum depression in China (“Mommy go”): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Primary-level and community worker interventions for the prevention of mental disorders and the promotion of well-being in low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

There is a significant research gap in the field of universal, selective, and indicated prevention interventions for mental health promotion and the prevention of mental disorders. Barriers to closing the research gap include scarcity of skilled human resources, large inequities in resource distribution and utilization, and stigma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of delivery by primary workers of interventions for the promotion of mental health and universal prevention, and for the selective and indicated prevention of mental disorders or symptoms of mental illness in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To examine the impact of intervention delivery by primary workers on resource use and costs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, PsycInfo, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 29 November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of primary-level and/or community health worker interventions for promoting mental health and/or preventing mental disorders versus any control conditions in adults and children in LMICs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Standardized mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) were used for continuous outcomes, and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, using a random-effects model. We analyzed data at 0 to 1, 1 to 6, and 7 to 24 months post-intervention. For SMDs, 0.20 to 0.49 represented small, 0.50 to 0.79 moderate, and ≥ 0.80 large clinical effects. We evaluated the risk of bias (RoB) using Cochrane RoB2.

MAIN RESULTS

Description of studies We identified 113 studies with 32,992 participants (97 RCTs, 19,570 participants in meta-analyses) for inclusion. Nineteen RCTs were conducted in low-income countries, 27 in low-middle-income countries, 2 in middle-income countries, 58 in upper-middle-income countries and 7 in mixed settings. Eighty-three RCTs included adults and 30 RCTs included children. Cadres of primary-level workers employed primary care health workers (38 studies), community workers (71 studies), both (2 studies), and not reported (2 studies). Interventions were universal prevention/promotion in 22 studies, selective in 36, and indicated prevention in 55 RCTs. Risk of bias The most common concerns over risk of bias were performance bias, attrition bias, and reporting bias. Intervention effects 'Probably', 'may', or 'uncertain' indicates 'moderate-', 'low-', or 'very low-'certainty evidence. *Certainty of the evidence (using GRADE) was assessed at 0 to 1 month post-intervention as specified in the review protocol. In the abstract, we did not report results for outcomes for which evidence was missing or very uncertain. Adults Promotion/universal prevention, compared to usual care: - probably slightly reduced anxiety symptoms (MD -0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.27 to -0.01; 1 trial, 158 participants) - may slightly reduce distress/PTSD symptoms (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.08; 4 trials, 722 participants) Selective prevention, compared to usual care: - probably slightly reduced depressive symptoms (SMD -0.69, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.30; 4 trials, 223 participants) Indicated prevention, compared to usual care: - may reduce adverse events (1 trial, 547 participants) - probably slightly reduced functional impairment (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.15; 4 trials, 663 participants) Children Promotion/universal prevention, compared to usual care: - may improve the quality of life (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.11; 2 trials, 803 participants) - may reduce adverse events (1 trial, 694 participants) - may slightly reduce depressive symptoms (MD -3.04, 95% CI -6 to -0.08; 1 trial, 160 participants) - may slightly reduce anxiety symptoms (MD -2.27, 95% CI -3.13 to -1.41; 1 trial, 183 participants) Selective prevention, compared to usual care: - probably slightly reduced depressive symptoms (SMD 0, 95% CI -0.16 to -0.15; 2 trials, 638 participants) - may slightly reduce anxiety symptoms (MD 4.50, 95% CI -12.05 to 21.05; 1 trial, 28 participants) - probably slightly reduced distress/PTSD symptoms (MD -2.14, 95% CI -3.77 to -0.51; 1 trial, 159 participants) Indicated prevention, compared to usual care: - decreased slightly functional impairment (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.10; 2 trials, 448 participants) - decreased slightly depressive symptoms (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.04; 4 trials, 771 participants) - may slightly reduce distress/PTSD symptoms (SMD 0.24, 95% CI -1.28 to 1.76; 2 trials, 448 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicated that prevention interventions delivered through primary workers - a form of task-shifting - may improve mental health outcomes. Certainty in the evidence was influenced by the risk of bias and by substantial levels of heterogeneity. A supportive network of infrastructure and research would enhance and reinforce this delivery modality across LMICs.

An m-Health Intervention for Rheumatoid Arthritis in China ("Rheumatism Center" app): Study Protocol for a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

AIM

To study the feasibility and effectiveness of a m-Health app in improving the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Sixty rheumatoid arthritis participants will be recruited for a 6-month feasibility study. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria will be randomly allocated to receive standard care or standard care plus the m-Health intervention. The primary outcome is the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial. In addition, we will investigate patient satisfaction in using the "Rheumatism Center" app in the intervention group. The secondary outcomes include the scores for the simplified disease activity index, clinical disease activity index, disease activity score 28, health assessment questionnaire and 6-item self-efficacy scale for chronic diseases. The assessments will be performed at baseline and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 6 months after the study is initiated. At the end of the study, we will also collect user views of the app through qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

This study is ongoing. The findings of this study will determine the feasibility and effectiveness of m-Health intervention in the management of rheumatoid arthritis, hoping to enhance the awareness of disease management and quality of life for rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Evaluation of the clinical application of the Postpartum Depression Predictors Inventory-Revised for postpartum women in China

AIM

This study was designed to assess the clinical applicability of the Postpartum Depression Predictors Inventory-Revised (PDPI-R) during the 1st month following delivery among women in China and to survey the prevalence of postpartum depression (PPD)-related risk factors included in the PDPI-R in this population.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study which recruited 447 women from the People's Liberation Army Hospital in Hefei of Anhui province. All participants completed the Chinese version of the PDPI-R (PDPI-R-C) and the Chinese version of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (C-EPDS) within 1 month of delivery. The predictive ability of the PDPI-R was then evaluated through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses.

RESULTS

The PDPI-R-C was able to accurately predict 73.2% of PPD cases (area under the ROC curve = 0.732; 95% CI 0.69-0.78) using a cut-off score of 5.5, as defined by a C-EPDS score of ≥10 (sensitivity = 62.8%; specificity = 73.5%; positive predictive value = 74.5%; negative predictive value = 61.5%). All 13 risk factors in the PDPI-R-C other than socioeconomic status and marital status were associated with the risk of PPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The PDPI-R-C was found to be an effective and easy-to-implement tool that has promise as a means of screening for PPD in Chinese populations.