Systematic review of Indigenous involvement and content in mental health interventions and their effectiveness for Indigenous populations

R. Lee, H. Brown, Sarah Salih, Anita C. Benoit
{"title":"Systematic review of Indigenous involvement and content in mental health interventions and their effectiveness for Indigenous populations","authors":"R. Lee, H. Brown, Sarah Salih, Anita C. Benoit","doi":"10.1177/00048674221089837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To assess the effects of psychological, psychosocial, educational and alternative interventions on mental health outcomes of Indigenous adult populations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States and the Indigenous involvement and content in each study. Methods: We systematically searched databases, key journals and gray literature, for records until June 2020. Eligible studies were in English or French and examined the impact of interventions on mental health outcomes including anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, psychological distress or stress for Indigenous adults (⩾16 years). Data were extracted using a modified Cochrane Data Extraction Form and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication. Quality was evaluated using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment form. Results: In total, 21 studies were eligible, comprising 8 randomized controlled trials, 10 single-group pre–post studies and 3 pre–post studies with comparison groups. Twenty studies had Indigenous individuals or organizations involved in some decision-making capacity, though extent of involvement varied widely. In total, 9 studies were rated moderate and 12 weak in the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment. Eight studies measuring depression, three measuring posttraumatic stress disorder, three measuring psychological distress and two measuring stress showed statistically significant improvements following the intervention. Conclusion: A wide range of interventions demonstrated mental health improvements. However, it is difficult to draw generalizable conclusions on intervention effectiveness, given heterogeneity among studies. Studies should employ a thorough assessment of the Indigenous involvement and content of their interventions for reporting and for critical consideration of the implications of their research and whether they address Indigenous determinants of mental health.","PeriodicalId":117457,"journal":{"name":"The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674221089837","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effects of psychological, psychosocial, educational and alternative interventions on mental health outcomes of Indigenous adult populations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States and the Indigenous involvement and content in each study. Methods: We systematically searched databases, key journals and gray literature, for records until June 2020. Eligible studies were in English or French and examined the impact of interventions on mental health outcomes including anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, psychological distress or stress for Indigenous adults (⩾16 years). Data were extracted using a modified Cochrane Data Extraction Form and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication. Quality was evaluated using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment form. Results: In total, 21 studies were eligible, comprising 8 randomized controlled trials, 10 single-group pre–post studies and 3 pre–post studies with comparison groups. Twenty studies had Indigenous individuals or organizations involved in some decision-making capacity, though extent of involvement varied widely. In total, 9 studies were rated moderate and 12 weak in the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment. Eight studies measuring depression, three measuring posttraumatic stress disorder, three measuring psychological distress and two measuring stress showed statistically significant improvements following the intervention. Conclusion: A wide range of interventions demonstrated mental health improvements. However, it is difficult to draw generalizable conclusions on intervention effectiveness, given heterogeneity among studies. Studies should employ a thorough assessment of the Indigenous involvement and content of their interventions for reporting and for critical consideration of the implications of their research and whether they address Indigenous determinants of mental health.
对土著居民参与精神卫生干预的内容及其对土著居民的有效性进行系统审查
目的:评估心理、社会心理、教育和替代干预措施对澳大利亚、加拿大、新西兰和美国土著成年人口心理健康结果的影响,以及土著参与每项研究的情况和内容。方法:系统检索数据库、关键期刊和灰色文献,检索截至2020年6月的记录。符合条件的研究是用英语或法语进行的,并检查了干预措施对心理健康结果的影响,包括土著成年人(小于或等于16岁)的焦虑症、创伤后应激障碍、抑郁症、心理困扰或压力。使用改进的Cochrane数据提取表和干预描述与复制模板提取数据。采用有效公共卫生实践项目质量评价表对质量进行评价。结果:共纳入21项研究,其中8项为随机对照试验,10项为单组后前研究,3项为对照组后前研究。20项研究有土著个人或组织参与某种决策能力,但参与程度差别很大。在有效公共卫生实践项目质量评价中,共有9项研究被评为中等,12项研究被评为弱。八项测量抑郁症的研究,三项测量创伤后应激障碍的研究,三项测量心理困扰的研究和两项测量压力的研究在干预后显示出统计学上显著的改善。结论:广泛的干预表明心理健康得到改善。然而,考虑到研究的异质性,很难得出关于干预有效性的一般性结论。研究应全面评估土著居民的参与情况及其干预措施的内容,以便进行报告,并批判性地审议其研究的影响,以及这些研究是否涉及土著居民心理健康的决定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信