King's College London

Research portal

Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries. / Jordans, Mark Joris; Semrau, Maya Hazel; Chisholm, Dan; Gurung, Dristy; Abdumalik, Jibril; Ahuja, Shalini; Mugisha, James; Mntambo, Ntokozo; Kigozi, Fred; Petersen, Inge; Shidhaye, Rahul; Upadhyaya, Nawaraj; Lund, Christopher Alan; Thornicroft, Graham John; Gureje, Oye.

In: BJPsych Open, 2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Jordans, MJ, Semrau, MH, Chisholm, D, Gurung, D, Abdumalik, J, Ahuja, S, Mugisha, J, Mntambo, N, Kigozi, F, Petersen, I, Shidhaye, R, Upadhyaya, N, Lund, CA, Thornicroft, GJ & Gureje, O 2019, 'Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries', BJPsych Open.

APA

Jordans, M. J., Semrau, M. H., Chisholm, D., Gurung, D., Abdumalik, J., Ahuja, S., ... Gureje, O. (Accepted/In press). Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries. BJPsych Open.

Vancouver

Jordans MJ, Semrau MH, Chisholm D, Gurung D, Abdumalik J, Ahuja S et al. Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries. BJPsych Open. 2019.

Author

Jordans, Mark Joris ; Semrau, Maya Hazel ; Chisholm, Dan ; Gurung, Dristy ; Abdumalik, Jibril ; Ahuja, Shalini ; Mugisha, James ; Mntambo, Ntokozo ; Kigozi, Fred ; Petersen, Inge ; Shidhaye, Rahul ; Upadhyaya, Nawaraj ; Lund, Christopher Alan ; Thornicroft, Graham John ; Gureje, Oye. / Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries. In: BJPsych Open. 2019.

Bibtex Download

@article{9d8129ce1c9c4c6d96f8268a8154edd0,
title = "Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries",
abstract = "Background: In most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), routine mental health information is unavailable or unreliable, making monitoring of mental health care coverage difficult. This study aims to evaluate a new set of mental health indicators introduced in primary health care settings in five LMIC.Method: A survey was conducted among primary health care workers (n=272) to assess acceptability and feasibility of eight new indicators monitoring mental health care needs, utilization, quality and payments. Also, primary health facility case records (n=583) were reviewed by trained research assistants to assess the level of completion (yes/no) for each of the indicators and subsequently the level correctness of completion (correct/incorrect – with incorrect defined as illogical, missing, illegible information) of the indicators used by health workers. Assessments were conducted within one month after the introduction of the indicators, as well as 6-9 months afterwards.Results: Across both time points and across all indicators 78{\%} of the measurements of completion were correct. Among the best performing indicators (diagnosis, severity and treatment), this was significantly higher. With regards to correctness, 87{\%} of all completed indicators were correctly completed. There was a trend towards improvement over time. Health workers’ perceptions on feasibility and utility, across sites and over time, reported a positive attitude in 81{\%} of all measurements.Conclusion: This study demonstrates high levels of performance and perceived utility for a set of indicators designed that can ultimately be used to monitor coverage of mental health care in primary health care settings in LMIC. We recommend for these indicators to be incorporated into existing health information systems; and adopted within the WHO Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) implementation strategy",
author = "Jordans, {Mark Joris} and Semrau, {Maya Hazel} and Dan Chisholm and Dristy Gurung and Jibril Abdumalik and Shalini Ahuja and James Mugisha and Ntokozo Mntambo and Fred Kigozi and Inge Petersen and Rahul Shidhaye and Nawaraj Upadhyaya and Lund, {Christopher Alan} and Thornicroft, {Graham John} and Oye Gureje",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
journal = "BJPsych Open",
issn = "2056-4724",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of performance and perceived utility of mental health care indicators in routine health information systems in five low- and middle-income countries

AU - Jordans, Mark Joris

AU - Semrau, Maya Hazel

AU - Chisholm, Dan

AU - Gurung, Dristy

AU - Abdumalik, Jibril

AU - Ahuja, Shalini

AU - Mugisha, James

AU - Mntambo, Ntokozo

AU - Kigozi, Fred

AU - Petersen, Inge

AU - Shidhaye, Rahul

AU - Upadhyaya, Nawaraj

AU - Lund, Christopher Alan

AU - Thornicroft, Graham John

AU - Gureje, Oye

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Background: In most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), routine mental health information is unavailable or unreliable, making monitoring of mental health care coverage difficult. This study aims to evaluate a new set of mental health indicators introduced in primary health care settings in five LMIC.Method: A survey was conducted among primary health care workers (n=272) to assess acceptability and feasibility of eight new indicators monitoring mental health care needs, utilization, quality and payments. Also, primary health facility case records (n=583) were reviewed by trained research assistants to assess the level of completion (yes/no) for each of the indicators and subsequently the level correctness of completion (correct/incorrect – with incorrect defined as illogical, missing, illegible information) of the indicators used by health workers. Assessments were conducted within one month after the introduction of the indicators, as well as 6-9 months afterwards.Results: Across both time points and across all indicators 78% of the measurements of completion were correct. Among the best performing indicators (diagnosis, severity and treatment), this was significantly higher. With regards to correctness, 87% of all completed indicators were correctly completed. There was a trend towards improvement over time. Health workers’ perceptions on feasibility and utility, across sites and over time, reported a positive attitude in 81% of all measurements.Conclusion: This study demonstrates high levels of performance and perceived utility for a set of indicators designed that can ultimately be used to monitor coverage of mental health care in primary health care settings in LMIC. We recommend for these indicators to be incorporated into existing health information systems; and adopted within the WHO Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) implementation strategy

AB - Background: In most low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), routine mental health information is unavailable or unreliable, making monitoring of mental health care coverage difficult. This study aims to evaluate a new set of mental health indicators introduced in primary health care settings in five LMIC.Method: A survey was conducted among primary health care workers (n=272) to assess acceptability and feasibility of eight new indicators monitoring mental health care needs, utilization, quality and payments. Also, primary health facility case records (n=583) were reviewed by trained research assistants to assess the level of completion (yes/no) for each of the indicators and subsequently the level correctness of completion (correct/incorrect – with incorrect defined as illogical, missing, illegible information) of the indicators used by health workers. Assessments were conducted within one month after the introduction of the indicators, as well as 6-9 months afterwards.Results: Across both time points and across all indicators 78% of the measurements of completion were correct. Among the best performing indicators (diagnosis, severity and treatment), this was significantly higher. With regards to correctness, 87% of all completed indicators were correctly completed. There was a trend towards improvement over time. Health workers’ perceptions on feasibility and utility, across sites and over time, reported a positive attitude in 81% of all measurements.Conclusion: This study demonstrates high levels of performance and perceived utility for a set of indicators designed that can ultimately be used to monitor coverage of mental health care in primary health care settings in LMIC. We recommend for these indicators to be incorporated into existing health information systems; and adopted within the WHO Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) implementation strategy

M3 - Article

JO - BJPsych Open

JF - BJPsych Open

SN - 2056-4724

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454