A qualitative evaluation of the use of Problem Management Plus (PM+) among Arabic-speaking migrants with psychological distress in France - The APEX study.
P J Surkan, D Rayes, L Bertuzzi, N Figueiredo, M Melchior, A Tortelli
{"title":"A qualitative evaluation of the use of Problem Management Plus (PM+) among Arabic-speaking migrants with psychological distress in France - The APEX study.","authors":"P J Surkan, D Rayes, L Bertuzzi, N Figueiredo, M Melchior, A Tortelli","doi":"10.1080/20008066.2024.2325243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>ABSTRACT</b><b>Background:</b> Feasibility studies with non-French speaking migrants in France are needed to inform appropriate adaptation of psychosocial intervention procedures.<b>Objective:</b> To test the WHO Problem Management Plus (PM+) intervention protocol for Arabic-speaking migrants in the Paris metropolitan region.<b>Methods:</b> Between 2019 and 2021 we recruited participants from three accommodation centres receiving asylum seekers or migrants experiencing social and economic difficulties. Participants experiencing psychological distress underwent five PM + sessions with trained helpers. Feasibility was evaluated through 15 interviews with 8 participants, 4 helpers, and 3 study supervisors. Interview topics covered PM + implementation in general and for each component. We also sought to understand problems with delivery and gathered suggestions for improvement. Data were analysed thematically using a deductive approach.<b>Results:</b> We found implementation of PM + to be feasible, with predominantly positive reactions from participants, helpers and study staff. All intervention components were considered beneficial, with breathing exercises considered easy to implement and often sustained. Selection of problems and strategies to address them were described as challenging to execute. Psychosocial support from and rapport with helpers and the use of the native language were considered key strengths of the programme. However, we observed the need for complementary or higher intensity psychological support in some cases. Findings also highlighted the importance of addressing distress among non-specialist helpers delivering PM + . Finally, local guidance to social resources were suggested to be added in the protocol.<b>Conclusion:</b> PM + was well-liked and feasible, with cultural adjustments and increased access to community resources for migrants needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12055,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","volume":"15 1","pages":"2325243"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953778/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2024.2325243","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACTBackground: Feasibility studies with non-French speaking migrants in France are needed to inform appropriate adaptation of psychosocial intervention procedures.Objective: To test the WHO Problem Management Plus (PM+) intervention protocol for Arabic-speaking migrants in the Paris metropolitan region.Methods: Between 2019 and 2021 we recruited participants from three accommodation centres receiving asylum seekers or migrants experiencing social and economic difficulties. Participants experiencing psychological distress underwent five PM + sessions with trained helpers. Feasibility was evaluated through 15 interviews with 8 participants, 4 helpers, and 3 study supervisors. Interview topics covered PM + implementation in general and for each component. We also sought to understand problems with delivery and gathered suggestions for improvement. Data were analysed thematically using a deductive approach.Results: We found implementation of PM + to be feasible, with predominantly positive reactions from participants, helpers and study staff. All intervention components were considered beneficial, with breathing exercises considered easy to implement and often sustained. Selection of problems and strategies to address them were described as challenging to execute. Psychosocial support from and rapport with helpers and the use of the native language were considered key strengths of the programme. However, we observed the need for complementary or higher intensity psychological support in some cases. Findings also highlighted the importance of addressing distress among non-specialist helpers delivering PM + . Finally, local guidance to social resources were suggested to be added in the protocol.Conclusion: PM + was well-liked and feasible, with cultural adjustments and increased access to community resources for migrants needed.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) is a peer-reviewed open access interdisciplinary journal owned by the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS). The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) aims to engage scholars, clinicians and researchers in the vital issues of how to understand, prevent and treat the consequences of stress and trauma, including but not limited to, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorders, substance abuse, burnout, and neurobiological or physical consequences, using the latest research or clinical experience in these areas. The journal shares ESTSS’ mission to advance and disseminate scientific knowledge about traumatic stress. Papers may address individual events, repeated or chronic (complex) trauma, large scale disasters, or violence. Being open access, the European Journal of Psychotraumatology is also evidence of ESTSS’ stand on free accessibility of research publications to a wider community via the web. The European Journal of Psychotraumatology seeks to attract contributions from academics and practitioners from diverse professional backgrounds, including, but not restricted to, those in mental health, social sciences, and health and welfare services. Contributions from outside Europe are welcome. The journal welcomes original basic and clinical research articles that consolidate and expand the theoretical and professional basis of the field of traumatic stress; Review articles including meta-analyses; short communications presenting new ideas or early-stage promising research; study protocols that describe proposed or ongoing research; case reports examining a single individual or event in a real‑life context; clinical practice papers sharing experience from the clinic; letters to the Editor debating articles already published in the Journal; inaugural Lectures; conference abstracts and book reviews. Both quantitative and qualitative research is welcome.