Browsing by Author "Tomlinson, M"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Evaluating the effectiveness of a multi-component intervention on early childhood development in paediatric HIV care and treatment programmes: a randomised controlled trial
    (BioMed Central, 2018-07-09) Chingono, R; Mebrahtu, H; Mupambireyi, Z; Simms, V; Weiss, H A; Ndlovu, P; Charasika, F; Tomlinson, M; Cluver, L D; Cowan, F M; Sherr, L
    Background HIV infection in a family may affect optimum child development. Our hypothesis is that child development outcomes among HIV-exposed infants will be improved through a complex early childhood stimulation (ECS) programme, and income and loans saving programme for HIV positive parents. Methods The study was a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 30 clinic sites in two districts in Zimbabwe. Clinics were randomised in a 1:1 allocation ratio to the Child Health Intervention for Development Outcomes (CHIDO) intervention or Ministry of Health standard care. The CHIDO intervention comprises three elements: a group ECS parenting programme, an internal savings and lending scheme (ISALS) and case-management home visits by village health workers. The intervention was aimed at caregiver-child dyads (child aged 0–24 months) where the infant was HIV exposed or infected. The primary outcomes were cognitive development (assessed by the Mullen Scales of Early Learning) and retention of the child in HIV care, at 12 months after enrolment. A comprehensive process evaluation was conducted. Discussion The results of this cluster-randomised trial will provide important information regarding the effects of multi-component interventions in mitigating developmental delays in HIV-exposed infants living in resource-limited environments. Trial registration This trial is registered with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry ( www.pactr.org ), registration number PACTR201701001387209; the trial was registered on 16th January 2017 (retrospectively registered).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Open Access
    Impact of integrated district level mental health care on clinical and functioning outcomes of people with depression and alcohol use disorder in Nepal: a non-randomised controlled study
    (2020-09-14) Jordans, M J D; Garman, E C; Luitel, N P; Kohrt, B A; Lund, C; Patel, V; Tomlinson, M
    Abstract Background Integration of mental health services into primary healthcare is proliferating in low-resource countries. We aimed to evaluate the impact of different compositions of primary care mental health services for depression and alcohol use disorder (AUD), when compared to usual primary care services. Methods We conducted a non-randomized controlled study in rural Nepal. We compared treatment outcomes among patients screening positive and receiving: (a) primary care mental health services without a psychological treatment component (TG); (b) the same services including a psychological treatment (TG + P); and (c) primary care treatment as usual (TAU). Primary outcomes included change in depression and AUD symptoms, as well as disability. Disability was measured using the 12-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule. Symptom severity was assessed using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire for depression, the 10-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test for AUD. We used negative binomial regression models for the analysis. Results For depression, when combining both treatment groups (TG, n = 77 and TG + P, n = 60) compared to TAU (n = 72), there were no significant improvements. When only comparing the psychological treatment group (TG + P) with TAU, there were significant improvements for symptoms and disability (aβ = − 2.64; 95%CI − 4.55 to − 0.74, p = 0.007; aβ = − 12.20; 95%CI − 19.79 to − 4.62; p = 0.002, respectively). For AUD, when combining both treatment groups (TG, n = 92 and TG + P, n = 80) compared to TAU (n = 57), there were significant improvements in AUD symptoms and disability (aβ = − 15.13; 95%CI − 18.63 to − 11.63, p < 0.001; aβ = − 9.26; 95%CI − 16.41 to − 2.12, p = 0.011; respectively). For AUD, there were no differences between TG and TG + P. Patients’ perceptions of health workers’ skills in common psychological factors were associated with improvement in depression patient outcomes (β = − 0.36; 95%CI − 0.55 to − 0.18; p < 0.001) but not for AUD patients. Conclusion Primary care mental health services for depression may only be effective when psychological treatments are included. Health workers’ competencies as perceived by patients may be an important indicator for treatment effect. AUD treatment in primary care appears to be beneficial even without additional psychological services.