Combating the mental health impacts of climate change with innovative interventions

In a recent review published in a magazine NPJ Mental Health Research, Researchers conducted a scoping study to assess the impact of climate change on global mental and psychosocial health. They will further explore the results of studies that have introduced unique interventions or intervention packages aimed at mitigating or reversing these effects. A review of more than 5,000 potentially relevant publications revealed 40 studies examining the link between mental health and climate change. The findings revealed 37 unique intervention regimes that operate across the social system level, from microsystems to macrosystems.

The present review highlights the novelty of this area of ​​research, as the majority of included interventions have not (yet) been formally evaluated within a robust scientific framework. Nevertheless, the results of preliminary interventions are promising, especially when applied to low- and middle-income countries that are disproportionately affected by climate change. Although large-scale clinical trials are needed before some of these interventions can become public health recommendations, this review highlights the progress scientists have made in this field and lays the foundation for further research into mental health disorders. It summarizes.

Research: Climate change-related mental health and psychosocial interventions: A scoping review. Image credit: Lightspring / Shutterstock

Climate change and mental health

Climate change refers to observable long-term changes in local or (often) global temperature, rainfall, and weather patterns. Historically, these changes occurred gradually, usually as a result of natural processes. However, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, human activities (particularly the burning of fossil fuels and agricultural activities) have caused unprecedented levels of greenhouse gas emissions, significantly accelerating global warming.

Since global warming and climate change were described in the 1970s, scientists and clinicians have established solid links between climate change and adverse population-level health effects. Elevated risks of hunger and disease are at an all-time high, and the prevalence and severity of age-related chronic diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are rapidly increasing. Although new, research investigating the link between climate change and mental health is becoming increasingly popular, especially in the wake of recent pandemic-related social distancing regulations and their impact on psychological health. Masu.

“Researchers in the climate change and mental health field are working to pathologize recognition of the deleterious effects of climate change on mental health and culturally specific and anticipated adaptive responses to ongoing and anticipated threats. We recognize that there is a complex tension between the

Recent studies have demonstrated that climate change has a negative impact on the mental health of individuals, with significant environment-related effects being observed on psychiatric mortality (post-traumatic stress disorder) in patients. Masu. [PTSD], depression, and increased suicide risk). Although some of these studies have recommended and tested interventions against these adverse outcomes, significant gaps exist in intervention adoption and subsequent evidence-based analysis of outcomes. Even reviews that attempt to understand these results suffer from shortcomings common to studies involving suboptimal scales. Either they focus on fine-scale outcomes for only one of the two metrics, climate and spirit, or they broaden their horizons too much and generalize by incorporating non-optimal ones. Climate change and stress factors.

About research

The current review has three main objectives. 1. Review and evaluate existing interventions aimed at improving mental health or mitigating climate impacts on mental health. 2. Assess a wide range of mental health and well-being outcomes, not limited by traditional psychiatric definitions. 3. Applying the first two to “gray literature” is intended for unpublished, unformally defined evidence that has served an exploratory role to inform future research . This review method was designed according to his JBI manual for evidence synthesis and prospectively registered in the OSF database on March 9, 2022.

Research data collection was conducted using a custom search strategy applied to three online scientific repositories, namely MEDLINE, Web of Science, and PsycINFO, from database inception until May 2, 2022, to search the available literature. It started with screening. Citations of publications identified in this way were further manually searched. To uncover relevant information not found in public databases. The gray literature equivalent was performed through a cascade of four steps. 1. Targeted database search. 2. Google search. 3. Targeted website searches. 4. Consult with key stakeholders following the methodology and best practice guidelines of Godin et al. and Pollock et al.

Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers using the Rayyan.ai platform. The sampling process focused on publication and sample records (authors, publication year, study design, participants' sociodemographics, medical history) and mental health outcomes. However, other relevant details were also recorded, such as the theoretical framework, intervention parameters (duration, cost, delivery method), facilitator characteristics, and stakeholder involvement in co-designing the intervention.

Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory was used to present and discuss the review data. This theory describes an individual's ecological environment across her four spatial levels: micro, meso, exo, and macro.

Interventions and their action levels identified based on Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory applied to public mental health research.

Research results and take-home message

Of the 6,248 records initially revealed by the database search, 1,122 were found to be duplicates and were removed from the analysis. Of the remaining 5,126 unique publications, title and abstract screening excluded 4,932, and full text screening excluded a further 178, resulting in a final set of 16 studies representing 13 non-overlapping interventions. A set of publications was obtained. A gray literature screen revealed an additional 24 interventions.

Stressors considered included general climate change, stochastic weather events (wildfires, droughts, floods), and phenomena (cyclones, typhoons, etc.). Remarkably, although there have been over 20 years of research in this field, half of the publications included in this review were produced in the last three years alone, and the negative effects of climate change This highlights the growing academic interest in

Only 56% (n = 9) of the included academic studies included a clinical trial-like setting with quantitative estimates of outcome measures, making it easier to implement informed policy interventions. It has become clear that there is a significant lack of empirical evidence for this. Encouragingly, despite limited support and validation, this preliminary evidence is positive and shows significant improvements in mental health and psychosocial functioning for individuals enrolled in these programs. I am. The consequences were observed to be most severe in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Oceania, and the Caribbean.

Some of these programs that have produced unexpectedly positive mental health outcomes have been identified as community-wide resilience-building programs. Prominent examples include the Katatagan program in the Philippines and the Skills for Life Adjustment and Resilience (SOLAR) program in Tuvalu. Although these programs have different goals and methodologies, they demonstrate solid scientific soundness, demonstrate community-wide improvement, and may serve as pilot studies for future scaled-up interventions.

Almost all gray area studies presented unique interventions, but their scientific soundness cannot be verified, especially since most of those studies were conducted by private companies and had limited publicly available data. was.

“Overall, the conceptual linkage of interventions at the interface of climate change and mental health appears to be still in its infancy, with most interventions being de novo designed based on scant or anecdotal evidence. Future Interventions We encourage you to consider the definition of health in your vision: the benefit of underserved groups, co-design, equitable access, and sustainability. ”