Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar 16:14:21.
doi: 10.1186/s13033-020-00346-x. eCollection 2020.

Implementation process and outcomes of a mental health programme integrated in primary care clinics in rural Mexico: a mixed-methods study

Georgina Miguel-Esponda  1 , Nathaniel Bohm-Levine  2 , Fátima Gabriela Rodríguez-Cuevas  3 , Alex Cohen  1 , Ritsuko Kakuma  1
Affiliations

Implementation process and outcomes of a mental health programme integrated in primary care clinics in rural Mexico: a mixed-methods study

Georgina Miguel-Esponda et al. Int J Ment Health Syst. .

Abstract

Background: Policies and programmes in Mexico promote the integration of mental health services into primary health care (PHC), however these services remain largely unavailable in the country. Since 2014 a non-governmental organisation has delivered a mental health programme at PHC clinics in the state of Chiapas, in partnership with the local Ministry of Health (MoH). The programme provides mental health services based on the mhGAP guidelines through multiple implementation strategies, including programme financing, infrastructure strengthening, high-intensity training, and supervision. This study aimed to examine the implementation process and outcomes of this mental health programme to understand the extent to which mental health care integration has been achieved and to identify the successes and remaining challenges in order to inform the development and implementation of similar programmes.

Methods: We used a mixed-methods convergent design. Quantitative data for the period between December 2016 and December 2017 were extracted from the organisation's health information system to capture process indicators, including the amount (dose) and quality (fidelity) of services delivered. We conducted two focus groups and 24 semi-structured interviews with health providers and managers to ascertain implementation outcome data: penetration, fidelity, acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed using descriptive and framework analyses, respectively.

Results: During the study period, health providers delivered mental health consultations to 486 adults diagnosed with a mood or anxiety disorder. Programme fidelity was limited given that talk-based interventions, which are required in all consultations according to programme guidelines, were only provided in 24% of consultations. Only 42% of service users attended more than 50% of scheduled mental health follow-up consultations, which also hindered fidelity. Low attendance is partially attributed to limited programme appropriateness, given that interventions to address social risk factors are not available. High levels of acceptability and feasibility enabled through strong support from the organisation were key programme strengths.

Conclusions: Mental health programmes at PHC can be implemented when adequate support and supervision structures are in place, and key resources are available. There is an urgent need for health systems strengthening to support efforts to provide mental health care, and to link PHC with locally-relevant social interventions.

Keywords: Anxiety; Depression; Implementation; Implementation outcomes; Mental health programmes; Mexico; Mixed-methods; Primary health care; Process; Rural.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CES mental health programme: organisational support and service delivery
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Reasons for lack of treatment fidelity (N = 350)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Number of mental health consultations scheduled and attended per service user (N = 336)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Summary of findings according to implementation outcomes
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Xavier M. Mexico: the Hidalgo experience. A new approach to mental health care. In: Ameida J, Cohen A, editors. Innovative mental health programs in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington: Pan American Health Organization; 2008.
    1. de Salud S. Programa de Acción Específico Salud Mental 2013–2018. México: Secretaría de Salud; 2014.
    1. Gorn SB, Solano NS, Medina-Mora Icaza ME, Basaurí VA, Reyes JG. Evaluación del sistema de salud mental en México: ¿hacia dónde encaminar la atención? Revista Panamericana Salud Pública. 2013;33(4):253. - PubMed
    1. Secretaría de Salud de México, Organización Panamericana de la Salud, Organización Mundial de la Salud. Informe de la evaluación del sistema de salud mental en México utilizando el Instrumento de Evaluación para Sistemas de Salud Mental de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (IESM-OMS) Mexico: Organización Panamericana de la Salud/Organización Mundial de la Salud, 2011.
    1. Medina-Mora ME, Borges G, Muñoz CL, Benjet C, Jaimes JB, Fleiz Bautista C, et al. Prevalencia de trastornos mentales y uso de servicios: resultados de la Encuesta Nacional de Epidemiología Psiquiátrica en México. Salud Mental. 2003;26(4):1–16.

LinkOut - more resources