Pawel Hursztyn, Almas Khan, K. Matvienko-Sikar, K. Kõlves, Marguerite M. Nyhan, John Browne
{"title":"影响公共卫生突发事件期间提供心理健康服务的因素:范围界定审查协议","authors":"Pawel Hursztyn, Almas Khan, K. Matvienko-Sikar, K. Kõlves, Marguerite M. Nyhan, John Browne","doi":"10.12688/hrbopenres.13850.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Unforeseeable public health emergencies (PHEs) profoundly impact psychological well-being and disrupt mental health care provision in affected regions. To enhance preparedness for future emergencies, it is crucial to understand the effectiveness of mental health services, their underlying mechanisms, the populations they are tailored to, and their appropriateness across distinct emergencies. The aim of this scoping review will be to explore how mental health services have responded to PHEs, focusing on their effectiveness as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation. Methods Following the five-stage Arksey-O'Malley guidance, as updated further by Westphaln and colleagues, this mixed-methods scoping review will search academic and grey literature. Publications related to mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs will be considered for inclusion. The interventions and supports are operationally defined as any adaptations to mental health service provision at the international, national, regional or community level as a consequence of PHEs. The “Four Ss” framework will be utilised to provide structure for the evidence synthesis and inform categorisation of interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. Any research methodology will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts of publications against eligibility criteria. The gathered data will be depicted in accordance with the Four Ss” framework through the utilisation of descriptive/analytical statistics and supplemented by narrative exploration of findings. Conclusions Considering the diverse research methodologies and the varied applicability of services in different contexts of PHEs, this review will offer insights into the type, effectiveness, and implementation barriers and facilitators of mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. By employing the “Four Ss” framework, the review will guide decision-making bodies in identifying effective and practical aspects of mental health system operations during emergencies.","PeriodicalId":508744,"journal":{"name":"HRB Open Research","volume":"55 34","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors influencing mental health service delivery during public health emergencies: a scoping review protocol\",\"authors\":\"Pawel Hursztyn, Almas Khan, K. Matvienko-Sikar, K. Kõlves, Marguerite M. Nyhan, John Browne\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/hrbopenres.13850.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Unforeseeable public health emergencies (PHEs) profoundly impact psychological well-being and disrupt mental health care provision in affected regions. To enhance preparedness for future emergencies, it is crucial to understand the effectiveness of mental health services, their underlying mechanisms, the populations they are tailored to, and their appropriateness across distinct emergencies. The aim of this scoping review will be to explore how mental health services have responded to PHEs, focusing on their effectiveness as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation. Methods Following the five-stage Arksey-O'Malley guidance, as updated further by Westphaln and colleagues, this mixed-methods scoping review will search academic and grey literature. Publications related to mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs will be considered for inclusion. The interventions and supports are operationally defined as any adaptations to mental health service provision at the international, national, regional or community level as a consequence of PHEs. The “Four Ss” framework will be utilised to provide structure for the evidence synthesis and inform categorisation of interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. Any research methodology will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts of publications against eligibility criteria. The gathered data will be depicted in accordance with the Four Ss” framework through the utilisation of descriptive/analytical statistics and supplemented by narrative exploration of findings. Conclusions Considering the diverse research methodologies and the varied applicability of services in different contexts of PHEs, this review will offer insights into the type, effectiveness, and implementation barriers and facilitators of mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. By employing the “Four Ss” framework, the review will guide decision-making bodies in identifying effective and practical aspects of mental health system operations during emergencies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HRB Open Research\",\"volume\":\"55 34\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HRB Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13850.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HRB Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13850.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景不可预见的公共卫生突发事件(PHEs)对受影响地区的心理健康造成了深远的影响,并扰乱了心理保健服务的提供。为了加强对未来突发事件的准备,了解心理健康服务的有效性、其基本机制、服务对象以及在不同突发事件中的适宜性至关重要。本次范围界定审查的目的是探讨心理健康服务如何应对紧急状况,重点关注其有效性以及实施过程中的障碍和促进因素。方法 按照由 Westphaln 及其同事进一步更新的 Arksey-O'Malley 五阶段指南,本范围界定综述将采用混合方法搜索学术文献和灰色文献。与公共健康教育期间提供的心理健康干预和支持相关的出版物将被考虑纳入其中。干预和支持在操作上被定义为因公共健康教育而在国际、国家、地区或社区层面对心理健康服务提供的任何调整。将利用 "四个S "框架为证据综述提供结构,并为在公共健康教育期间提供的干预和支持的分类提供信息。任何研究方法都将被考虑纳入。两名审稿人将根据资格标准独立筛选出版物的标题、摘要和全文。收集到的数据将按照 "四个 S "框架进行描述,即利用描述性/分析性统计,并辅以对研究结果的叙述性探讨。结论 考虑到研究方法的多样性以及公共卫生教育服务在不同情况下的不同适用性,本综述将对公共卫生教育期间所提供的心理健康干预和支持的类型、有效性、实施障碍和促进因素进行深入分析。通过采用 "四个 S "框架,本综述将指导决策机构确定紧急情况下心理健康系统运作的有效和实用方面。
Factors influencing mental health service delivery during public health emergencies: a scoping review protocol
Background Unforeseeable public health emergencies (PHEs) profoundly impact psychological well-being and disrupt mental health care provision in affected regions. To enhance preparedness for future emergencies, it is crucial to understand the effectiveness of mental health services, their underlying mechanisms, the populations they are tailored to, and their appropriateness across distinct emergencies. The aim of this scoping review will be to explore how mental health services have responded to PHEs, focusing on their effectiveness as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation. Methods Following the five-stage Arksey-O'Malley guidance, as updated further by Westphaln and colleagues, this mixed-methods scoping review will search academic and grey literature. Publications related to mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs will be considered for inclusion. The interventions and supports are operationally defined as any adaptations to mental health service provision at the international, national, regional or community level as a consequence of PHEs. The “Four Ss” framework will be utilised to provide structure for the evidence synthesis and inform categorisation of interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. Any research methodology will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts of publications against eligibility criteria. The gathered data will be depicted in accordance with the Four Ss” framework through the utilisation of descriptive/analytical statistics and supplemented by narrative exploration of findings. Conclusions Considering the diverse research methodologies and the varied applicability of services in different contexts of PHEs, this review will offer insights into the type, effectiveness, and implementation barriers and facilitators of mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. By employing the “Four Ss” framework, the review will guide decision-making bodies in identifying effective and practical aspects of mental health system operations during emergencies.