Evidence is scarce in terms of tracking the progress of implementation of mental healthcare plans and policies (MHPPs) in Europe, we aimed to map and analyze the content of MHPPs across the WHO European region. We collected data from the WHO Mental Health Atlas 2011, 2017 and 2020 to map the development of MHPPs in the region. We contacted 53 key informants from each country in the European region to triangulate the data from WHO Mental Health Atlases and to obtain access to the national mental health plans and policies. We analyzed the content of MHPPs against the four major objectives of the WHO Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan, and we also focused on the specificity and measurability of their targets. The number and proportion of countries which have their own MHPPs has increased from 30 (52%) to 43 (91%) between 2011 and 2020. MHPPs are generally in line with the WHO policy, aiming to strengthen care in the community, expand mental health promotion and illness prevention activities, improve quality of care, increase intersectoral collaboration, build workforce and system capacity, and improve adherence to human rights. However, specific, and measurable targets as well as a description of concrete steps, responsibilities and funding sources are mostly missing. They often contain very little information systems, evidence and research, and mostly lack information on evaluating the implementation of MHPPs. Progress has been made in terms of the development of MHPPs in the WHO Europe. However, MHPPs are often lacking operationalization and appropriate data collection for evaluation. This is then reflected in missing evaluation plans, which in turn leads to lessons not being learned. To enhance the potential for knowledge generation and demonstration of impact, MHPPs should be more specific and contain measurable targets with allocated responsibilities and funding as well as evaluation plans.
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
Mental health policies and plans (MHPPs) are important policy instruments and powerful tools to facilitate development of mental health systems and services across the world. We aimed to map and analyse methods and tools used to assess the extent, process and impact of implementing MHPPs. We systematically searched peer-reviewed and grey literature across seven scientific databases. We extracted and analysed the data on a) the characteristics of included studies (e.g., policy areas, region of origin, income setting) and b) the methodology and evaluation tools applied to assess the extent and process of implementation. We included 48 studies in the analyses. Twenty-six of these studies employed only qualitative methods (e.g., semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, desk review, stakeholder consultations); 12 studies used quantitative methods (e.g., trend analysis, survey) and 10 used mixed-methods approaches. Generally, methods and tools used for assessment were described poorly with less than half of the studies providing partial or full details about them. Only three studies provided assessment of full policies. There is a lack of rigorous research to assess implementation MHPPs. Assessments of the implementation of entire MHPPs are almost non-existent. Strategies to assess the implementation of MHPPs should be an integral part of MHPPs.
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
