Problem Management Plus (PM+) has been effective in reducing mental health problems among refugees at three-month follow-up, but there is a lack of research on its long-term effectiveness. This study examined the effectiveness of PM+ in reducing symptoms of common mental disorders at 12-month follow-up among Syrian refugees in the Netherlands.

This single-blind, parallel, controlled trial randomised 206 adult Syrians who screened positive for psychological distress and impaired functioning to either PM+ in addition to care as usual (PM+/CAU) or CAU alone. Assessments were at baseline, 1 week and 3 months after the intervention and 12 months after baseline. Outcomes were psychological distress (Hopkins Symptom Checklist [HSCL-25]), depression (HSCL-25 subscale), anxiety (HSCL-25 subscale), posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms (PCL-5), functional impairment (WHODAS 2.0) and self-identified problems (PSYCHLOPS).

In March 2019–December 2022, 103 participants were assigned to PM+/CAU and 103 to CAU of which 169 (82.0%) were retained at 12 months. Intention-to-treat analyses showed greater reductions in psychological distress at 12 months for PM+/CAU compared to CAU (adjusted mean difference −0.17, 95% CI −0.310 to −0.027; p = 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.28). Relative to CAU, PM+/CAU participants also showed significant reductions on anxiety (−0.19, 95% CI −0.344 to −0.047; p = 0.01, d = 0.31) but not on any of the other outcomes.

PM+ is effective in reducing psychological distress and symptoms of anxiety over a period up to 1 year. Additional support such as booster sessions or additional (trauma-focused) modules may be required to prolong and consolidate benefits gained through PM+ on other mental health and psychosocial outcomes.

Despite high levels of psychological distress, mental health service use among Syrian refugees in urban settings is low. To address the mental healthcare gap, the World Health Organization developed group problem management plus (gPM+), a scalable psychological intervention delivered by non-specialist peer facilitators. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of gPM+ in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety among Syrian refugees in Istanbul, Türkiye.

A randomized controlled trial was conducted among 368 distressed (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K10 > 15) adult Syrian refugees with impaired functioning (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS 2.0 > 16). Participants were recruited between August 2019 and September 2020 through a non-governmental organization providing services to refugees. Participants were randomly allocated to gPM+ and enhanced care as usual (gPM+/E-CAU) (184 participants) or E-CAU only (184 participants). Primary outcomes were symptoms of depression and anxiety (Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25)) at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms (PTSD Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5; PCL-5), functional impairment (WHODAS 2.0), and self-identified problems (psychological outcome profiles).

Intent-to-treat analyses showed no significant effect of gPM+ on symptoms of anxiety, depression, PTSD and self-identified problems. Yet, there was a significant reduction in functional impairment in gPM+/E-CAU compared to E-CAU at 3-month follow-up (adjusted mean difference 1.66, 95 % CI 0.04, 3.27, p = 0.045, d = 0.19). Post-hoc subgroup analyses among participants with probable baseline depression or anxiety showed that there was a small but significant reduction in depression (adjusted mean difference −0.17, 95 % CI −0.32, −0.02, p = 0.028, d = 0.27) and anxiety (adjusted mean difference −0.21, 95 % CI −0.37, −0.05, p = 0.009, d = 0.30) symptoms comparing gPM+/E-CAU to E-CAU only at 1-week post assessment, but not at 3-month follow-up. There was a significant difference between conditions on functional impairment at 3-month follow-up, favouring gPM+/E-CAU condition (adjusted mean difference −1.98, 95 % CI −3.93, −0.02, p = 0.048, d = 0.26).

In this study in an urban setting in Türkiye, gPM+ did not alleviate symptoms of depression and anxiety among Syrian refugees experiencing psychological distress and daily living difficulties. However, participants with higher distress at baseline seemed to benefit from gPM+, but treatment gains disappeared in the long term. Current findings highlight the potential benefit of tailored psychosocial interventions for highly distressed refugees in volatile low-resource settings.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, people with mental disorders were exposed to a common and prolonged source of stress. Studies focusing on the consequences of the pandemic on individuals with a history of mental disorder are scarce, but they suggest a higher vulnerability as compared to the general population.

We aimed at identifying predictors of stress resilience maintained over time among these people during the first two years of the pandemic.

The presented study is part of a larger 2-year, 5-wave international longitudinal online survey.

The Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale and the PTSD Checklist DSM-5 were used as latent class indicators for a proxy measure of distress. Specifically, a Latent-Class Analysis was performed to identify a group that showed resilient outcomes across all waves.

We investigated socio-demographic characteristics, economic and housing status, lifestyle and habits, pandemic-related issues, and chronic disease. Adherence to and approval of the restrictions imposed, trust in governments and the scientific community during the pandemic were also assessed. Social support, fear of contamination and personal values were investigated respectively through the Oslo Social Support Scale, the Padua Inventory, and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. The aforementioned characteristics were used to predict sustained resilience through a logistic regression.

A total of 1711 participants out of the total sample (8011 participants from 13 different countries) reported a diagnosis of mental disorder before the pandemic. Nine hundred forty-three participants completed at least three of the five versions of the survey and were included in the analysis. A latent class of participants with resilience maintained over time (sustained resilience) was identified, with an estimated probability of 24.8%. The demographic and clinical variables associated with a higher chance of sustained resilience were older age, maintaining a job during the pandemic, and having a larger number of people in the household. In contrast, female gender, losing job during the pandemic, having difficulty meeting basic needs, greater fear of contamination, a stronger focus on hedonism, less social support and feeling lonely resulted in a lower likelihood of being sustained resilient.

This study identified a number of factors that may help predict resilient outcomes maintained over time in people with mental disorders. COVID-19 related predictors of sustained resilience are new findings which might inform resilience-building interventions during pandemics.

None Declared

Sleep disturbances are common following traumatic brain injury (TBI) worsening morbidity and other neuropsychiatric symptoms. Post-TBI alterations in sleep architecture require further study.

(1) To evaluate polysomnographic measures of sleep architecture in participants with history of TBI compared to controls and as meta-analyses of pooled means. (2) To evaluate effects of timing and severity of TBI on polysomnographic outcomes.

PRISMA compliant systematic review was conducted of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE and Scopus. Inclusion criteria: 1) reporting polysomnography in the context of TBI and 2) operationalizing TBI using clear/formalized criteria. Data were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses with outcomes expressed as mean differences (MD).

In participants with TBI, sleep was comprised of 19.39% REM sleep, 8.13% N1, 51.18% N2, and 17.53% N3, as determined by meta-analyses of single means. Total sleep time was reduced in chronic (>6 months) TBI compared to acute-intermediate TBI (<6 months) (p=0.01). Compared to controls, participants with TBI differed with increased N1 sleep (MD=0.64%; 95%CI=0.02,1.25; p=0.04), reduced sleep efficiency (MD=-1.65%; 95%CI=-3.18,-0.12; p=0.03), and reduced sleep latency on the multiple sleep latency test (MD=-5.90mins; 95%CI=-10.09,-1.72; p<0.01). On sub-group analyses, participants with mild TBI differed from controls with reduced total sleep time (MD=-29.22mins, 95%CI=-54.16,-4.27; p=0.02). Similarly, participants with acute-intermediate TBI exhibited increased sleep latency compared to controls (MD=8.96mins; 95%CI=4.07,13.85; p<0.01) and differed significantly from participants with chronic TBI (X2(1,N=608)=6.54; p=0.01).

Sleep architecture is altered following TBI with potential implications regarding functional outcomes and recovery. These alterations appear to differ based on severity of injury and time since injury.

No significant relationships.

Only a limited number of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to a first course of antidepressant medication (ADM). We investigated the feasibility of creating a baseline model to determine which of these would be among patients beginning ADM treatment in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

A 2018–2020 national sample of n = 660 VHA patients receiving ADM treatment for MDD completed an extensive baseline self-report assessment near the beginning of treatment and a 3-month self-report follow-up assessment. Using baseline self-report data along with administrative and geospatial data, an ensemble machine learning method was used to develop a model for 3-month treatment response defined by the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomatology Self-Report and a modified Sheehan Disability Scale. The model was developed in a 70% training sample and tested in the remaining 30% test sample.

In total, 35.7% of patients responded to treatment. The prediction model had an area under the ROC curve (s.e.) of 0.66 (0.04) in the test sample. A strong gradient in probability (s.e.) of treatment response was found across three subsamples of the test sample using training sample thresholds for high [45.6% (5.5)], intermediate [34.5% (7.6)], and low [11.1% (4.9)] probabilities of response. Baseline symptom severity, comorbidity, treatment characteristics (expectations, history, and aspects of current treatment), and protective/resilience factors were the most important predictors.

Although these results are promising, parallel models to predict response to alternative treatments based on data collected before initiating treatment would be needed for such models to help guide treatment selection.

Fewer than half of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to psychotherapy. Pre-emptively informing patients of their likelihood of responding could be useful as part of a patient-centered treatment decision-support plan.

This prospective observational study examined a national sample of 807 patients beginning psychotherapy for MDD at the Veterans Health Administration. Patients completed a self-report survey at baseline and 3-months follow-up (data collected 2018–2020). We developed a machine learning (ML) model to predict psychotherapy response at 3 months using baseline survey, administrative, and geospatial variables in a 70% training sample. Model performance was then evaluated in the 30% test sample.

32.0% of patients responded to treatment after 3 months. The best ML model had an AUC (SE) of 0.652 (0.038) in the test sample. Among the one-third of patients ranked by the model as most likely to respond, 50.0% in the test sample responded to psychotherapy. In comparison, among the remaining two-thirds of patients, <25% responded to psychotherapy. The model selected 43 predictors, of which nearly all were self-report variables.

Patients with MDD could pre-emptively be informed of their likelihood of responding to psychotherapy using a prediction tool based on self-report data. This tool could meaningfully help patients and providers in shared decision-making, although parallel information about the likelihood of responding to alternative treatments would be needed to inform decision-making across multiple treatments.

Refugees and asylum-seekers are typically exposed to multiple potentially traumatic events (PTEs) in the context of war, persecution and displacement, which confer elevated risk for psychopathology. There are significant limitations, however, in extant approaches to measuring these experiences in refugees. The current study aimed to identify profiles of PTE exposure, and the associations between these profiles and key demographics, contextual factors (including ongoing stressors, method of travel to Australia and separation from family), mental health and social outcomes, in a large sample of refugees resettled in Australia.

Participants were 1085 from Arabic, Farsi, Tamil and English-speaking refugee backgrounds who completed an online or pen-and-paper survey in their own language. Constructs measured included PTE exposure, demographics, pre-displacement factors, ongoing stressors, post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, depression symptoms, anger reactions, plans of suicide and social engagement.

Latent class analysis identified four profiles of PTE exposure, including the torture and pervasive trauma class, the violence exposure class, the deprivation exposure class and the low exposure class. Compared to the low exposure class, participants in the trauma-exposed classes were more likely to be male, highly educated, from Farsi and Tamil-speaking backgrounds, have travelled to Australia by boat, experience more ongoing stressors and report both greater psychological symptoms and social engagement.

This study found evidence for four distinct profiles of PTE exposure in a large sample of resettled refugees, and that these were associated with different demographic, psychological and social characteristics. These findings suggest that person-centred approaches represent an important potential avenue for investigation of PTE exposure in refugees, particularly with respect to identifying subgroups of refugees who may benefit from different types or levels of intervention according to their pre-migration PTE experiences.

Common mental disorders are highly prevalent among Syrian refugees. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a brief, transdiagnostic, non-specialist helper delivered, psychological intervention targeting psychological distress. This single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) on PM+ delivered by peer-refugees examined trial procedures in advance of a definitive RCT, evaluated PM+ 's acceptability and feasibility, and investigated its likely effectiveness and cost-effectiveness among Syrian refugees in the Netherlands.

Adult Syrian refugees (N = 60) with elevated psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) score >15) and reduced pychosocial functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) score >16) were randomised into PM+ in addition to care as usual (CAU) (PM+/CAU; n = 30) or CAU alone (n = 30). Primary outcomes were symptoms of depression and anxiety (Hopkins Symptom Checklist; HSCL-25) at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were pychosocial functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule; WHODAS 2.0), symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (PTSD Checklist for DSM 5; PCL-5) and self-identified problems (Psychological Outcomes Profiles; PSYCHLOPS). Changes in service utilisation and time out of employment and/or adult education were estimated (adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory; CSRI). Semi-structured interviews on the implementation of PM+ were conducted with stakeholders (i.e. six PM+ participants, five non-specialist helpers and five key informants).

Recruitment, randomization and blinding procedures were successful. PM+ was generally perceived positively by stakeholders, especially regarding the intervention strategies, accommodation of the intervention and the helpers. Two serious adverse events not attributable to the trial were reported. At 3-month follow-up, the HSCL-25 total score was significantly lower for the PM+/CAU group (n = 30) than CAU group (n = 30) (p = 0.004; d = 0.58). Significant differences in favour of PM+/CAU were also found for WHODAS psychosocial functioning (p = 0.009, d = 0.73), PCL-5 symptoms of PTSD (p = 0.006, d = 0.66) and PSYCHLOPS self-identified problems (p = 0.005, d = 0.81). There were no significant differences in mean health service costs (p = 0.191) and the mean costs of lost productive time (p = 0.141). This suggests PM+ may potentially be cost-effective with an incremental cost from a health system perspective of €5047 (95% CI €0–€19 773) per additional recovery achieved.

Trial procedures and PM+ delivered by non-specialist peer-refugee helpers seemed acceptable, feasible and safe. Analyses indicate that PM+ may be effective in improving mental health outcomes and psychosocial functioning, and potentially cost-effective. These results support the development of a definitive RCT with a larger sample of refugees and a longer follow-up period.

Psychological interventions that are brief, acceptable, effective and can be delivered by non-specialists are especially necessary in low- and middle-income countries, where mental health systems are unable to address the high level of psychosocial needs. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a five-session intervention designed for those impaired by psychological distress while living in communities affected by adversity. Individual PM+ has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing distress in Kenya and Pakistan, and a group version of PM+ (Group PM+) was effective for conflict-affected women in Pakistan. This paper describes a feasibility and acceptability trial of locally adapted Group PM+ for women and men in an earthquake-affected region of rural Nepal.

In this feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial, participants in the experimental arm were offered five sessions of Group PM+ and participants in the control arm received enhanced usual care (EUC), which entailed brief psycho-education and providing referral options to primary care services with health workers trained in the mental health Gap Action Programme Intervention Guide (mhGAP-IG). A mixed-methods design was used to assess the feasibility and acceptability of Group PM+. Feasibility was assessed with criteria including fidelity and retention of participants. Acceptability was assessed through in-depth interviews with participants, family members, programme staff and other stakeholders. The primary clinical outcome was depression symptoms assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) administered at baseline and 8–8.5 weeks post-baseline (i.e. after completion of Group PM+ or EUC).

We recruited 121 participants (83% women and 17% men), with equal allocation to the Group PM+ and EUC arms (1:1). Group PM+ was delivered over five 2.5–3 hour sessions by trained and supervised gender-matched local non-specialists, with an average attendance of four out of five sessions. The quantitative and qualitative results demonstrated feasibility and acceptability for non-specialists to deliver Group PM+. Though the study was not powered to assess for effectiveness, for all five key outcome measures, including the primary clinical outcome, the estimated mean improvement was larger in the Group PM+ arm than the EUC arm.

The intervention and trial procedures were acceptable to participants, family members, and programme staff. The communities and participants found the intervention to be beneficial. Because feasibility and acceptability were established in this trial, a fully powered randomised controlled trial will be conducted for larger scale implementation to determine the effectiveness of the intervention in Nepal.

Research exploring the longitudinal course of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms has documented four modal trajectories (low, remitting, high, and delayed), with proportions varying across studies. Heterogeneity could be due to differences in trauma types and patient demographic characteristics.

This analysis pooled data from six longitudinal studies of adult survivors of civilian-related injuries admitted to general hospital emergency departments (EDs) in six countries (pooled N = 3083). Each study included at least three assessments of the clinician-administered PTSD scale in the first post-trauma year. Latent class growth analysis determined the proportion of participants exhibiting various PTSD symptom trajectories within and across the datasets. Multinomial logistic regression analyses examined demographic characteristics, type of event leading to the injury, and trauma history as predictors of trajectories differentiated by their initial severity and course.

Five trajectories were found across the datasets: Low (64.5%), Remitting (16.9%), Moderate (6.7%), High (6.5%), and Delayed (5.5%). Female gender, non-white race, prior interpersonal trauma, and assaultive injuries were associated with increased risk for initial PTSD reactions. Female gender and assaultive injuries were associated with risk for membership in the Delayed (v. Low) trajectory, and lower education, prior interpersonal trauma, and assaultive injuries with risk for membership in the High (v. Remitting) trajectory.

The results suggest that over 30% of civilian-related injury survivors admitted to EDs experience moderate-to-high levels of PTSD symptoms within the first post-trauma year, with those reporting assaultive violence at increased risk of both immediate and longer-term symptoms.