CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Mental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Policy Implementation SciencePsychiatric care and mental health services

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

‘Opening up the mind’: problem-solving therapy delivered by female lay health workers to improve access to evidence-based care for depression and other common mental disorders through the Friendship Bench Project in Zimbabwe

Open access
Abas, Melanie, Bowers, Tarryn, Manda, Ethel, Cooper, Sara, Machando, Debra, Verhey, Ruth, Lamech, Neha, Araya, Ricardo, Chibanda, Dixon·2016·International Journal of Mental Health Systems
DOI 10.1186/s13033-016-0071-9PMC PMC4865009
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are few accounts of evidence-based interventions for depression and other common mental disorders (CMDs) in primary care in low-income countries. The Friendship Bench Project is a collaborative care mental health intervention in primary care in Harare for CMDs which began as a pilot in 2006. CASE PRESENTATION: We employed a mixture of quantitative and qualitative approaches to investigate the project's acceptability and implementation, 4-8 years after the initial pilot study. We carried out basic descriptive analyses of routine data on attendance collected between 2010 and 2014. We also conducted five focus group discussions (FGDs) with LHWs in 2013 and 12 in-depth interviews, six with staff and six with patients, to explore experiences of the intervention, which we analysed using grounded theory. Results show that the intervention appears highly acceptable as evidenced by a consistent number of visits between 2010 and 2014 (mean 505 per year, SD 132); by the finding that the same team of female community LHWs employed as government health promoters continue to deliver assessment and problem-solving therapy, and the perceived positive benefits expressed by those interviewed. Clients described feeling 'relieved and relaxed' after therapy, and having their 'mind opened', and LHWs describing satisfaction from being agents of change. Characteristics of the LHWs (status in the community, maturity, trustworthiness), and of the intervention (use of locally validated symptom screen, perceived relevance of problem-solving therapy) and continuity of the LHW team appeared crucial. Challenges to implementation included the LHWs ongoing need for weekly supervision despite years of experience; the supervisors need for supervision for herself; training needs in managing suicidal and hostile clients; poor documentation; lack of follow-up of depressed clients; and poor access to antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS: This case study shows that a collaborative care intervention for CMDs is positively received by patients, rewarding for LHWs to deliver, and can be sustained over time at low cost. Next steps include evaluation of the impact of the intervention through a randomised trial, and testing of a technological platform for supporting supervision and monitoring clients' attendance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13033-016-0071-9

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Patients seen at the Friendship Bench
Fig. 1 Patients seen at the Friendship BenchCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Proportion of visits where the LHWs made onward referral for additional support (n = 656)
Fig. 2 Proportion of visits where the LHWs made onward referral for additional support (n = 656)CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: selective coding techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage: Newbury Park; 1998. p. 43–6.
  2. Zimbabwe Ministry of Health and Child Welfare. The National Health Strategy for Zimbabwe 2009–2013: equity and quality in health a people’s right. Zimbabwe: National Healthcare Trust; 2009.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–114 of 114

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Abas, M., Bowers, T., Manda, E., Cooper, S., Machando, D., Verhey, R., Lamech, N., Araya, R., & Chibanda, D.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Zimbabwe (ZW)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • Women's University in Africa (ZW)
  • Schizophrenia Research Foundation (IN)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Bowers, Tarryn
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Mental Health Systems
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-05-11
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
39-39
ISSN
1752-4458 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s13033-016-0071-9
PMC
PMC4865009
OpenAlex
W2391003650
Cited by
114
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
12.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of Mental Health Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open University of Cape Town (University of Cape Town) (submittedVersion)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
Grand Challenges Canada (09/31/2012 – 09/30/2015)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
problem-solving therapy, lay health workers, community mental health workers, depression, common mental disorders, collaborative care, primary care mental health, treatment acceptability, implementation barriers, supervision, Zimbabwe

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review