Journal Article > ResearchAbstract
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2010 September 14; Volume 57 (Issue 6); DOI:10.1177/0020764010382367
Souza R, Porten K, Nicholas S, Grais RF
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2010 September 14; Volume 57 (Issue 6); DOI:10.1177/0020764010382367
BACKGROUND: There is little evidence to describe the feasibility and outcomes of services for the care of street children and youth in low-income countries. AIMS: To describe the outcomes of a multidisciplinary case management approach delivered in a drop-in centre for street children and youth. METHODS: A longitudinal study of street children and youth followed in an urban drop-in centre. Four hundred (400) street children and youth received a multidisciplinary case management therapeutic package based on the community reinforcement approach. The main outcomes were changes in psychological distress, substance abuse and social situation scores. RESULTS: The median follow-up time for the cohort was 18 months. There were reductions in the levels of psychological distress (p = 0.0001) and substance abuse (p ≤ 0.0001) in the cohort as well as an improvement in the social situation of street children and youth (p = 0.0001). There was a main effect of gender (p < 0.001) and a significant interaction of gender over time (p < 0.001) on improvements in levels of psychological distress. Survival analysis showed that the probability of remaining on substances at 12 months was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.69-0.81) and 0.51 (95% CI: 0.42-0.59) at 24 months. At 12 months, fewer female patients remained using substances compared to male (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: To be most effective, programmes and strategies for children and youth in street situations in developing countries should target both their health and social needs.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2023 December 1; Volume 69 (Issue 8); 1898-1908.; DOI:10.1177/00207640231179323
Shaw SA, Lee CT, Ahmadi M, Karim Shor Muluk H, Mohamed Jibril Z, et al.
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2023 December 1; Volume 69 (Issue 8); 1898-1908.; DOI:10.1177/00207640231179323
BACKGROUND
Among refugees residing in countries of first asylum, such as Malaysia, high rates of psychological distress call for creative intervention responses.
AIMS
This study examines implementation of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) model promoting emotional well-being and access to services.
METHOD
The one-session intervention was implemented in community settings by refugee facilitators during 2017 to 2020. 140 Participants including Afghan ( n = 43), Rohingya ( n = 41), and Somali ( n = 56) refugees were randomized to receive either the intervention at baseline, or to a waitlist control group. At 30 days post-intervention, all participants completed a post-assessment. Additionally, after completing the intervention, participants provided feedback on SBIRT content and process.
RESULTS
Findings indicate the intervention was feasible to implement. Among the full sample, Refugee Health Screening-15 emotional distress scores reduced significantly among participants in the intervention group when compared to those in the waitlist control group. Examining findings by nationality, only Afghan and Rohingya participants in the intervention condition experienced significant reductions in distress scores compared to their counterparts in the control condition. Examining intervention effects on service access outcomes, only Somali participants in the intervention condition experienced significant increases in service access compared to the control condition.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings indicate the potential value of this SBIRT intervention, warranting further research.
Among refugees residing in countries of first asylum, such as Malaysia, high rates of psychological distress call for creative intervention responses.
AIMS
This study examines implementation of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) model promoting emotional well-being and access to services.
METHOD
The one-session intervention was implemented in community settings by refugee facilitators during 2017 to 2020. 140 Participants including Afghan ( n = 43), Rohingya ( n = 41), and Somali ( n = 56) refugees were randomized to receive either the intervention at baseline, or to a waitlist control group. At 30 days post-intervention, all participants completed a post-assessment. Additionally, after completing the intervention, participants provided feedback on SBIRT content and process.
RESULTS
Findings indicate the intervention was feasible to implement. Among the full sample, Refugee Health Screening-15 emotional distress scores reduced significantly among participants in the intervention group when compared to those in the waitlist control group. Examining findings by nationality, only Afghan and Rohingya participants in the intervention condition experienced significant reductions in distress scores compared to their counterparts in the control condition. Examining intervention effects on service access outcomes, only Somali participants in the intervention condition experienced significant increases in service access compared to the control condition.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings indicate the potential value of this SBIRT intervention, warranting further research.