The role of Law enforcement agencies (LEA) is significant in suicide prevention efforts as first responders. Nevertheless, no published study to date has systematically compiled the body of knowledge about suicide prevention efforts involving LEA. The current scoping review aims to methodically map and examine the peer-reviewed literature and grey literature on the role of LEA in suicide prevention. Electronic searches of the databases like Medline, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and Google were conducted using a comprehensive search strategy to identify relevant resources. Grey literature was searched searches were undertaken on relevant databases and, as well as government and organisational websites. The reporting of the review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The inclusion criteria comprised research articles, reports, and guidelines/policy documents on the role of law enforcement agencies (LEAs) in suicide prevention. Studies on prevalence, custodial settings, non-English publications, and reviews were excluded. Inclusion criteria comprised research articles, reports and guidelines/policy documents focusing on law enforcement’s role in suicide prevention. Studies focusing solely on prevalence or epidemiology, studies confined strictly to custodial settings, publications not in English and systematic reviews or meta-analyses were excluded. Out of 3,327 records screened, the full texts of 82 resources were included in the review. All the resources identified were categorised between peer-reviewed literature and grey literature. Resources were thematically categorised based on functional roles into- I. Strategic and System-Embedded Roles of LEA, II. Capacity Building and Training Oriented Engagements, III. Surveillance Reporting and Data Systems Role, IV. Community Facing and Preventive Engagement, and V. Means Restriction and Environmental Prevention Roles. The chronological development of the resources was inconsistent. Most resources were from high-income countries, focusing on the evaluation of training, capacity building programmes, surveillance initiatives and the exploration of varied roles of LEA across custodial, community and crisis settings and other interdisciplinary collaborations. Notably, the resources show increased disparity in quantity and research methodological approaches across geographies. The review highlights substantial heterogeneity and a limited resource base from low- and middle-income countries on the role of LEA in suicide prevention, with a dearth of structured, evidence-based, scalable models in these settings. These gaps point to an urgent need for locally relevant and cross-sectoral models that position law enforcement as integral partners in suicide prevention efforts, especially where these agencies play a major role as first responders.

Population ageing and the limited mental healthcare human resources are widening the service gap between older people’s mental healthcare needs and the system’s capacity in Hong Kong. Scaling up services through integration into the primary care system remains the main strategy to address unmet needs. In this study, we co-developed a primary mental healthcare system for older people with common mental health disorders with 33 stakeholders, including representatives from the government, primary healthcare services, charities, professionals, service users, caregivers and researchers. The study had three phases, including (1) rapid situational analysis (RSA) and survey to synthesise key elements and challenges of the existing service, (2) three rounds of theory of change (ToC) workshops (online) with stakeholders and (3) reach consensus and finalise the ToC map. A shared vision of No Wrong Door in Practice was established, operationalised as older adults experiencing improved mental health through integrated services from any entry point. The resulting ToC incorporated two interconnected pathways: (1) medical-social collaboration to provide integrated and person-centred care, and (2) community integration to empower older persons and carers to seek help and navigate the system confidently. Specific interventions, outcomes and outcome indicators were identified in the Hong Kong context for both pathways.

Community-based collaborative care (CBCC) is an internationally recognised model of integrated care that emphasises multidisciplinary teamwork and care coordination. In South Africa, community psychiatry has been integrated into some primary healthcare (PHC) facilities. This study examines healthcare providers’ perceptions of collaboration and its challenges in various integrated care settings. Three main components of CBCC (multidisciplinary teams, communication and case management) were explored through qualitative interviews with 29 staff members in 2 clinics. In Clinic-1, community psychiatry services operate independently in an outbuilding behind the main PHC clinic (“co-located”). In Clinic-2, these services are fully integrated within the PHC clinic (“physically integrated”). Both clinics had multidisciplinary teams, with various staff members conducting case management functions on an ad hoc basis. The physically integrated clinic (due to shared files, physical proximity and a facility manager with mental health experience) had greater levels of communication between the multidisciplinary team. In contrast, the co-located clinic struggled with poor management, unclear reporting structures and reinforced traditional hierarchies, limiting collaboration between the staff members. Integration does not guarantee collaboration. Improving collaboration between mental health and PHC staff requires clear roles, competent managers, CBCC endorsement from PHC clinicians, sufficient human resources and systematic communication channels, such as case review meetings.

Traditional faith healers (TFHs) are often consulted for serious mental illness (SMIs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Involvement of TFHs in mental healthcare could provide an opportunity for early identification and intervention to reduce the mental health treatment gap in LMICs. The aim of this study was to identify models of collaboration between TFHs and biomedical professionals, determine the outcomes of these collaborative models and identify any mechanisms (i.e., explanatory processes) or contextual moderators (i.e., barriers and facilitators) of these outcomes. A systematic scoping review of five electronic databases was performed from inception to March 2023 guided by consultation with local experts in Nigeria and Bangladesh. Data were extracted using a predefined data charting form and synthesised narratively. Six independent studies (eight articles) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Study locations included Ghana (n = 1), Nigeria (n = 1), Nigeria and Ghana (n = 1), India (n = 1), Hong Kong (n = 1) and South Africa (n = 1). We identified two main intervention typologies: (1) Western-based educational interventions for TFHs and (2) shared collaborative models between TFHs and biomedical professionals. Converging evidence from both typologies indicated that education for TFHs can help reduce harmful practices. Shared collaborative models led to significant improvements in psychiatric symptoms (in comparison to care as usual) and increases in referrals to biomedical care from TFHs. Proposed mechanisms underpinning outcomes included trust building and empowering TFHs by increasing awareness and knowledge of mental illness and human rights. Barriers to implementation were observed at the individual (e.g., suspicions of TFHs), relationship (e.g., reluctance of biomedical practitioners to equalise their status with TFHs) and service (e.g., lack of formal referral systems) levels. Research on collaborative models for mental healthcare is in its infancy. Preliminary findings are encouraging. To ensure effective collaboration, future programmes should incorporate active participation from community stakeholders (e.g., patients, caregivers, faith healers) and target barriers to implementation on multiple levels.

Signs of distress in dogs during veterinary visits are often normalised rather than viewed as welfare concerns. Interventions designed to reduce fear during veterinary visits were evaluated to see if they affected dogs’ behaviours compared to dogs without interventions. Twenty-eight dogs were examined at four visits across eight weeks. Dogs were randomised into intervention (distress reduction/adaptive care) and control groups (standard care) and evaluated via the Working Dog Questionnaire – Pet Dog Version (WDQ-Pet). At visit 1 (baseline) all dogs received the control protocol. Homework was assigned following visit 1 to practice collaborative examination (intervention) or to pet the dog (control) for the same allotted time. At each visit, behaviours were scored (clinical stress score) via video and in-person observations when dogs entered the hospital, stepped onto a scale to be weighed, entered the exam room, at the beginning and end of examination, and after venipuncture. There were no differences between groups at visit 1, or across visits entering the hospital or exam room. At visit 4, intervention scores either decreased or remained low when weighed, and at the beginning and end of the physical exam. Control scores were significantly higher than the intervention scores during these periods. Reduced clinical stress scores indicate intervention dogs had improved care experience compared to the control. The study results highlight the value of applying simple and adaptable interventions, ultimately leading to improved animal care and welfare.

The rising burden of neurological disorders poses significant challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. There has been an increasing momentum to apply integrated approaches to the management of several chronic illnesses in order to address systemic healthcare challenges and improve the quality of care for patients. The aim of this paper is to provide a narrative review of the current landscape of integrated care in neurology. We identified a growing body of research from countries around the world applying a variety of integrated care models to the treatment of common neurological conditions. Based on our findings, we discuss opportunities for further study in this area. Finally, we discuss the future of integrated care in Canada, including unique geographic, historical, and economic considerations, and the role that integrated care may play in addressing challenges we face in our current healthcare system.

Integrating mental health care in primary healthcare settings is a compelling strategy to address the mental health treatment gap in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Collaborative Care is the integrated care model with the most evidence supporting its effectiveness, but most research has been conducted in high-income countries. Efforts to implement this complex multi-component model at scale in LMICs will be enhanced by understanding the model components that have been effective in LMIC settings. Following Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group recommendations, we conducted a rapid review to identify studies of the effectiveness of Collaborative Care for priority adult mental disorders of mhGAP (mood and anxiety disorders, psychosis, substance use disorders and epilepsy) in outpatient medical settings in LMICs. Article screening and data extraction were performed using Covidence software. Data extraction by two authors utilized a checklist of key components of effective interventions. Information was aggregated to examine how frequently the components were applied. Our search yielded 25 articles describing 20 Collaborative Care models that treated depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, alcohol use disorder or epilepsy in nine different LMICs. Fourteen of these models demonstrated statistically significantly improved clinical outcomes compared to comparison groups. Successful models shared key structural and process-of-care elements: a multi-disciplinary care team with structured communication; standardized protocols for evidence-based treatments; systematic identification of mental disorders, and a stepped-care approach to treatment intensification. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies with respect to the specifics of model components, and clear evidence of the importance of tailoring the model to the local context. This review provides evidence that Collaborative Care is effective across a range of mental disorders in LMICs. More work is needed to demonstrate population-level and longer-term outcomes, and to identify strategies that will support successful and sustained implementation in routine clinical settings.

The needs of people with severe mental illness are complex and require a range of services embedded in well-coordinated systems of care to enable recovery, promote well-being and optimise social integration. The concept of recovery is strongly rooted in the centrality of multi and intersectoral systems of care, and, while multi and -intersectoral dimensions of mental health systems have been highlighted in analyses focusing on high-income regions, little has been elaborated in terms of these approaches in the recovery of people with severe mental illness (SMI) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The aim of this review was to identify and describe multi and intersectoral approaches underpinning community-based SMI recovery interventions in LMICs. A scoping review was carried out following the following steps: (1) Objectives for the review were developed and refined; (2) A systematic search of databases (EbscoHost, PubMed, Google Scholar) and previous reviews were undertaken from 2012 to 2022, where relevant papers were identified; (3) Papers with a focus on SMI and recovery, a specific description of an intervention, located in LMICs, with explicit linkages between sectors, and published in English, were selected for inclusion; (4) Data were extracted and charted and (5) Findings were analysed and reported thematically. Thirty-six papers were included for analysis, from 18 countries, including qualitative studies, trials, desktop and secondary data reviews and case studies. Examples of multi- and intersectoral action included collaboration between healthcare and community support systems, collaboration in providing supported housing and supportive community spaces for recovery, and linkages between biomedical and social spheres of care. Barriers included the dominance of mental health professions in delivering care, community-based stigmatising attitudes towards SMI. Multi- and intersectoral collaboration for SMI recovery requires investments in financing, education and coordination by a governing body.