1. Introduction
The burden of mental health disorders remains high in low-income countries (LICs), including the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). In 2021, 14.2 million people were reported to have mental health disorders, with 1.69 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and an estimated prevalence of 13.5%, making these disorders the seventh leading cause of morbidity in the DRC [
1,
2]. During the same period, at least 13,020 suicide deaths and 260,400 suicide attempts were reported [
2]. Considering the burden of neurological disorders (DALYs per 100,000 inhabitants: 946.7) and those linked to substance use (DALYs per 100,000 inhabitants: 171.4) [
1], this burden of disease increases considerably. As healthcare financing in the DRC is mainly provided by households through out-of-pocket payments [
3], the cost of treatment and care for mental health disorders would have a considerable negative impact on families and the national economy. It has been reported that in the DRC, for an episode of mental health disorder lasting 6 months, patients would pay up to USD 3600 in a psychiatric hospital [
4].
Despite this huge epidemiological and economic burden of mental health disorders, there are still large treatment and care gaps in the DRC, posing major challenges to making substantial progress towards the goal of “health for all”. The coverage of mental health services in the “formal” healthcare system is estimated at 5% nationwide [
5]. Healthcare facilities delivering mental health services remain essentially specialised and centralised and are sorely lacking at the peripheral level of the health system, i.e., health districts. To date, the country has only six recognised psychiatric hospitals with a total capacity of 500 beds, some 30 faith-based mental health centres, and private mental health clinics [
6,
7,
8], for a population estimated at 122 million in 2024 [
9], with most of them being based in the capital Kinshasa. In addition, financial, material, and human resources for mental health services are inadequate. For instance, the country has 0.1 psychiatrists, 0.25 mental health nurses, and 0.02 clinical psychologists per 100,000 inhabitants [
8], indicating the major challenges to be addressed if the goal of ‘health for all’ is to be achieved.
Given that the provision of biomedical mental health services remains almost non-existent in primary care settings [
10,
11], the majority of people in the DRC do not have access to evidence-based mental health services. Around 80% of people with unmet mental healthcare needs rely mainly on traditional approaches to care, including traditional medicine, prayers, incantations, and other alternative and informal care approaches, in both urban and rural areas [
10]. Thus, there is a need for an urgent adoption of strategies to address gaps in mental health services. Therefore, the DRC, which has an ambitious national mental health plan [
12], plans to address these mental healthcare gaps for all Congolese, by improving access through primary healthcare (PHC) settings.
In the DRC, PHC settings still have some way to go before they can offer quality services, including mental health services. When caring for people with mental, neurological, and substance use (MNS) disorders, it is currently very difficult in the country for PHC settings, which are consulted by around 80% of the population [
13], to correctly identify common MNS disorders and comorbidities, provide appropriate holistic curative care, ensure optimal rehabilitation for people with psychosocial disabilities, and provide appropriate mental health prevention and promotion, including the reduction in mental health-related stigma, etc. A pragmatic solution to address treatment and care gaps is to improve access to mental health services in primary care settings by shifting to or sharing mental health tasks with non-specialist care providers [
14,
15,
16]. To achieve this, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended integrating mental health services into PHC systems using evidence-based and cost-effective approaches [
17]. In our previous research, we defined integration as the process of introducing a mental health services package into the health activities of existing primary care facilities (i.e., health centres and the district hospital) and at the community level in a health district [
18].
To facilitate the implementation of integration in resource-limited countries, the WHO [
19] developed the mental health Gap Action Programme (acronym ‘mhGAP’) [
19]. The mhGAP emphasises the relevance of a multidisciplinary approach and intersectoral collaboration (including the health, social, educational, nutritional, and communication sectors, etc.) in addressing mental health problems, including community mental health [
20]. The mhGAP is a guideline developed in 2008. It is supported by its intervention guide, i.e., the mhGAP-IG. The mhGAP operations manual describes the three-phase mental health integration process and its main activities, which are listed below (
Box 1) [
20,
21,
22].
Since 2011, when a pilot integration experience was launched in the east of the country [
5], the DRC’s National Mental Health Programme (PNSM) has adopted the WHO’s mhGAP. Since then, a number of attempts to partially integrate mental health into the PHC system are being tested. To date, two ongoing experiences have attracted our attention, as both use the WHO’s mhGAP. These are the integration programme (or experience) in the Tshamilemba health district, in Haut-Katanga province, covering the period from May 2021 to December 2025; and the integration programme in the Mangembo health district, in the province of Kongo Central, covering the period from December 2022 to December 2026. The Tshamilemba integration programme is funded by the Institute of Tropical Medicine (ITM) in Antwerp as part of its fourth framework agreement supported by the Belgian Directorate-General for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid (DGD), while the Mangembo programme is financed by Memisa (a Belgian non-profit organisation) with funding from the DGD. In Tshamilemba, funding is limited to interventions relating to the integration of mental health, while in Mangembo, the district receives “systemic” financial support, spread over several years, for both the integration of mental health and its functioning. The aim of these two programmes is to demonstrate that the use of the WHO’s mhGAP for mental health integration in primary care settings in DRC’s health districts is feasible and effective. As such, these integration programmes would improve mental health outcomes, including access to and use of quality curative care among people with common MNS disorders attending PHC settings, and help reduce mental health-related stigma.
Box 1. Phases and main integration activities recommended in the mhGAP operations manual [
22].
The mhGAP operations manual describes the mental health integration process in three following phases:
Phase 1: Plan, which includes activities such as setting up an mhGAP operational team, conducting a situation analysis, developing an mhGAP operational plan and budget, and advocating for mental health;
Phase 2: Prepare, which includes activities such as adapting the components of the mhGAP package, training staff in mhGAP, preparing for clinical and administrative supervision, coordinating care pathways, improving access to psychotropic drugs, and improving access to psychological interventions;
Phase 3: Provide, which includes activities such as providing services at the facility level, providing treatment and care in the community, raising awareness of MNS conditions and available services, and supporting the implementation of prevention and promotion programmes.
It should be noted that although the country has a significant shortage of specialised mental health facilities, it does have at least 13,800 general healthcare facilities spread across 516 health districts [
6], which could provide primary mental health services if this offer were integrated into them. This agrees with national sub-sectoral mental health policy [
12]. This sub-sectorial mental health policy in the DRC was formulated in 1999 and revised in 2021 [
12]. It aims to promote the mental health of the entire Congolese population by providing comprehensive, integrated, and continuous quality healthcare and services with community participation, in the overall context of the fight against poverty. Its vision is to ensure that all Congolese have equitable and sustainable access to quality mental health services and care defined in the (minimum and complementary) packages of activities, adjusted to the needs of users, taking account of contextual changes. The sub-sectoral metal health policy comprises seven strategic orientations: (i) the integration of mental health services and care packages into the health district and the continuity of care; (ii) the strengthening of leadership and governance; (iii) the development of human resources involved in mental health; (iv) the improvement of infrastructures and the availability of mental health equipment and materials; (v) the improvement of the availability of psychotropic medicines and supplies; (vi) the improvement of mental health funding; and (vii) the strengthening of intra- and inter-sectoral partnerships [
12].
To the best of our knowledge, the two Congolese experiences testing the feasibility of the WHO’s mhGAP to integrating mental health into primary care settings, i.e., in the health districts of Tshamilemba and Mangembo, have not yet been rigorously documented. This raises doubts about the feasibility and effectiveness of the mhGAP in the Congolese context, making it difficult to argue in favour of scaling up the integration of mental health. In order to inform health system stakeholders, including decision-makers and their partners, on how to improve access to mental health services at health district level, the aim of this study was twofold: to describe the health outcomes of the two mental health integration programmes that tested the feasibility of the WHO’s mhGAP on the one hand, and on the other, to draw lessons learned from these experiences, to chart a pathway forward. This study would help fill evidence gaps on this topic and encourage (or not) the health system stakeholders to pursue efforts to integrate mental health.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Setting
This study was conducted in the urban health district of Tshamilemba in Lubumbashi and in the rural health district of Mangembo, both in the DRC. Tshamilemba is one of 27 districts in the province of Haut-Katanga, located in the southeast of the DRC, while Mangembo is one of the 31 districts in the province of Kongo Central, located in the western part of the country.
Table 1 describes the main characteristics of these health districts at the start of the programmes U and R.
It should be noted that in the urban health district of Tshamilemba, only the single health centre of Tshamilemba, directly serving 12,000 inhabitants, was concerned with the integration of mental health, and was therefore the subject of the study [
23]. Contrary to national health norms, this health centre has 15 doctors, 17 nurses, 2 midwives, and other health staff. In contrast, in the rural health district of Mangembo, all 19 healthcare facilities, i.e., 18 health centres and 1 district hospital in Mangembo, were involved [
24].
2.2. Design
We conducted a multiple case study [
25] on two similar experiences of integrating mental health services into PHC systems in Tshamilemba and in Mangembo, which are referred to as Programmes U (urban) and R (rural), respectively. Both programmes (i.e., U and R) involved interventions at three levels: the second level of care (district hospital) and the first level of care (health centre) as well as community. This collective, multiple “embedded” case study design, is therefore recommended when a study comprises more than one case and contains more than one sub-unit of analysis, thus making it possible to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods, with the triangulation of sources, data, analyses, etc., [
26,
27]. In addition, multiple case studies provide much more convincing results and evidence than single case studies, making this design more robust in the evaluation process when randomised studies with manipulation of variables are not possible [
25].
2.3. Cases Selection
The selected cases are the two programmes for integrating mental health services into the PHC system (as defined above), ongoing in the urban health district of Tshamilemba and the rural health district of Mangembo.
Table 2 summarises their main characteristics. The analysis units for these cases were the community, health centres in both Tshamilemba and Mangembo districts, and the Mangembo district hospital. The integration process, including its main activities, is defined by the WHO’s mhGAP operations manual described above. In the following paragraphs, we describe programmes U and R, and more in particular, the planned and implemented interventions.
2.4. Data Sources, Population, and Participant Selection
Data were collected from two sources: documents and key informants (KIs) who were (and/or still are) involved in the two integration programmes. The documents were drawn from three sources: (i) the health centre of Tshamilemba, a learning and research site of the School of Public Health of the University of Lubumbashi; (ii) the rural health district of Mangembo; and (iii) the DRC’s PNSM.
Three types of documents were selected purposively after applying the following criteria: documents dealing with the integration of mental health, written in French, dated from 2020 to 2024, and free of accessibility. After applying the above criteria, 12 documents: 3 project documents (narrative and statistical activity reports, etc.), 1 technical document, 1 policy document, as well as 4 of the routine health information system data files (.doc, .xlsx) were selected. These documents were complemented by 4 presentation files for the various workshops.
The KIs were healthcare providers, healthcare facility managers and health district managers team, (mental) health system decision-makers, specialist consultants in programmes, stakeholders in non-profit organisations active in mental health, academics and scientific experts in public (mental) health. They came from three countries: DRC, Guinea, and Belgium. A total of 37 KIs were selected on the basis of the following criteria: be over 18 years old; have been directly or indirectly involved in the design, planning and/or implementing of at least one of the two programmes studied; freely consent to take part in discussions or interviews and have a clear conscience.
2.5. Data, Collection Methods and Conducting a Multiple-Case Study
Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from July to August 2024. The qualitative data focused on the following: (i) stakeholders’ perceptions and opinions on the highlights of the integration programmes at the health centre of Tshamilemba and in the Mangembo district, in terms of the interventions planned and implemented, and on the changes in behaviour observed in reducing mental health-related stigma; (ii) the strengths and weaknesses, as well as the opportunities and threats of these programmes; (iii) possible solutions, recommendations and/or strategies for achieving greater sustainability; and finally, (iv) the lessons learned from the integration experiences testing the mhGAP guideline. The quantitative data concerned the intermediate quantitative outcomes of programmes obtained, in particular: the number of health professionals trained, the number of primary care facilities that have integrated mental health services provision, the number of people who have used health services, the number of patients who have experienced partial or total remission of symptoms, those who have dropped out of treatment, the number of patients referred and counter-referred in the healthcare system, etc.
To collect these data, we used different data collection methods: document review, including routine health information system review; focus group discussions (FGDs); and individual interviews. A combination of data collection methods is recommended for case study design [
26,
27]. Data collection was carried out in two phases.
First, we conducted a document review and routine health information system review from the health centre of Tshamilemba and the Mangembo district to collect the narrative and quantitative data contained in the documents. Second, we conducted three FGDs involving a total of 33 KIs; then 4 individual interviews with public (mental) health experts. The FGDs, organised in the form of workshops (face-to-face and online), and the individual interviews (exclusively online) were conducted in French, using an interview guide, and they lasted an average of 120 min. The FGDs and interviews were not recorded. However, a team of three research assistants (three male doctors with experience of qualitative health research) who had been previously trained took explanations and field notes of all the discussions.
During data collection, we used as a reference framework the theory of change (ToC) of the action research of Programme U. This ToC was inspired by the Programme for Improving Mental Health carE (PRIME). PRIME’s ToC has been used to improve access to mental healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) [
28]. The study procedure followed the operational model applied to the multiple case study [
25].
At the end of the first analysis of the study documents, we discussed the preliminary results with two resource persons involved in the two programmes, who provided their assessment for a credibility check. We considered their comments during the second analysis of the documents. We triangulated the sources of information, the data in the documents, and the aggregated data provided by reporting, in order to minimise information bias.
2.6. Data Management and Ethics
The field notes and all explanations given during the FGD and/or interview were systematically reviewed before moving on to the next stage. This enabled us to identify how to (re)adapt questions in the next stages of data collection. During the transcription process, the data were anonymised and/or pseudonymised and managed as such after all participant identifiers had been removed. To ensure credibility and validity, before being anonymised, each participant had the right to reread these answers/statements and was free to request that they be removed (or not). However, no complaints were registered in the sense of deletion. We then entered and stored these data in an NVivo database for qualitative analyses.
All quantitative data collected were aggregated and anonymised. Outliers were processed during quality check in Microsoft Excel software 16.0, developed by Microsoft in Redmond, Washington DC, USA. The data were then exported to IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) software 20 for statistical analysis.
Throughout all these data management procedures, the ethical considerations of the research were strictly respected. It should be noted that this study is part of a larger doctoral research project whose protocol was initially approved by both the Institutional Review Board of ITM Antwerp (IRB/RR/AC/187/1468/21) and the Medical Ethics Committee of the University of Lubumbashi (UNILU/CEM/034/2021). Participation was free and voluntary for all participants. Before participating in the FGDs or the interview, each participant provided free and informed consent orally.
We did not register any cases of refusal or withdrawal. We made a commitment and ensured that the information provided remained strictly confidential, even though it was not really sensitive given that the patient data had been aggregated and anonymised beforehand.
2.7. Data Analysis
Given the nature of the data collected, two types of analysis were performed: descriptive statistical analysis for quantitative data and content analysis for qualitative data. Statistical analysis enabled us to describe the health outcomes of integration by measuring several indicators. First, we measured the accessibility of mental health services using access indicators (including the availability of human resources and psychotropic drugs, geographical accessibility, financial accessibility, etc.). Second, we measured the use of these services by calculating indicators related to the functioning of health services, including mental health services. Third, the clinical profile of health service users was described by calculating the proportion of cases that requested this type of service.
In carrying out the content analysis, we (i) explored stakeholders’ perceptions of the programme regarding the reduction (or otherwise) of mental health-related stigma; and we (ii) explored and synthesised the lessons learned from these two integration experiences, testing the mhGAP. We then analysed the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, at the end of which we identified the challenges of implementing integration and solutions to achieve sustainability of these experiences.
4. Discussion
The results of this study, which aimed to document the health outcomes of Congolese integration experiences, testing the feasibility of the WHO’s mhGAP and to draw lessons learned from these experiences, show that it is feasible and effective to integrate a mental health services package into primary care settings, in both unstable emergency and more stable development contexts in the DRC. This study highlights encouraging findings despite the implementation challenges that (local) healthcare systems still need to address.
Nearly 2000 people were treated for mental health disorders in health centres at the district hospital, under both programmes, from 2021/22 to 2024. Between 70% and 75% of those treated recovered. In view of these results, we can readily admit that the integration testing of the WHO’s mhGAP in the Congolese context is feasible and effective and suggest that the interventions as described were largely consistent with the ToC adopted [
28]. During the study period, the curative consultation rate for MNS disorders, which was unknown at the start of the programme U, reached 7.1 NC/1000 inhabitants/year in 2022, then 14.4 NC/1000 inhabitants/year in 2024 in Tshamilemba. This curative consultation rate for MNS disorders, which was also unknown at the start of the programme R, reached 9.4 NC/1000 inhabitants/year in 2023, then 14.2 NC/1000 inhabitants/year in 2024 in Mangembo district. Although these rates of use are relatively low, these results support the postulate that in the Congolese urban and rural context, it is possible to integrate mental health into primary care settings, provided that the necessary resources are allocated [
29,
30] and that there is a firm commitment from the stakeholders in the healthcare system [
31,
32].
The majority of people who have received care for mental health reasons have done so on the front line and on an outpatient basis. Our professional experience in the DRC shows that people prefer to consult health centres because they know that they will return home the same day, unless the illness for which they are consulting is serious. One of the objectives of integration is to promote the provision of primary mental healthcare in an open setting [
33]. This may argue in favour of therapeutic interventions organised in an open setting, i.e., in health centres and at home or in the community.
The data used to calculate the indicators listed above come from two sources considered to be weak: (i) the healthcare facilities that generated them themselves, such as the health centre of Tshamilemba; and (ii) data from the national routine health information system that reports data after a validation process within the health district management team. It should be noted that the statistical data used were generated by healthcare providers who received no special payment for this task and whose remuneration conditions were often contested. In the absence of substantial remuneration, they could therefore afford to neglect their duties and be biased in their reporting. However, the quality of the data was enhanced by the quality of the discussions with the various stakeholders in the FGDs, including public (mental) health experts and academics who, as noted, were independent-minded. We also point out that the figures used in the denominator to calculate indicators are generally based on estimates. This calls for caution when interpreting these indicators.
The overall rates of use of curative consultations at primary care facilities in the two health districts for mental health reasons remained low. Low utilisation of mental health services remains a challenge in many countries [
34]. It is very likely that financial factors negatively influenced the use of curative care. In other programmes, such as those providing mental healthcare and psychosocial support to survivors of sexual and gender-based violence, where services were free at the point of use, the utilisation rate was estimated at 9 per 100 inhabitants per year [
5]. In addition to financial constraints, the belief in supernatural causes of mental health disorders, which is widespread in LMICs, has been identified as one of the factors explaining the low use of mental health services [
35,
36], particularly in contexts of exclusive health systems that do not allow any collaboration between Western, traditional, and alternative medicine. Furthermore, an intra-provincial or even inter-provincial comparison of these indicators remains questionable because of the pilot (and thus unrepresentative) nature of the integration experiences. Moreover, until recently, the official Congolese health information system used other indicators and definitions of mental health disorders (psychosis, neurosis, and epilepsy), which were quite different from those used in our studies [
11].
Even if the integration of mental health is sometimes advocated by certain healthcare providers, carers, and managers, it does remain problematic for other primary care providers [
34,
37,
38]. Fear of work overload, fear of being labelled as the carers of the “crazies”, difficult working conditions, and unsatisfactory salary conditions could be some of the reasons explaining their reluctance.
Research has also shown that some people with mild mental health problems do not see the need for seeking help because they do not properly recognise their symptoms [
39,
40]. Others with mental health problems refuse to go into care because they believe that health professionals may not take them seriously. They are oftentimes stigmatised or discriminated against when they attend healthcare facilities providing mental healthcare (including general healthcare facilities) [
41,
42].
The results indicated that the rate of general curative consultation gradually increased, rising from 38 NC/100 inhabitants/year in 2022 to 42 NC/100 inhabitants/year in 2024 in Tshamilemba and from 40 NC/100 inhabitants/year in 2023 to 43 NC/100 inhabitants/year in 2024 in Mangembo. Such an increase, although not drastic, is satisfying because people who had (and still have) unmet (mental) health needs can then turn to primary care facilities with the hope of receiving adequate care, thus increasing the likelihood of (local) health systems improving their progress towards UHC. The integration of mental health services contributes to an increase in curative consultation for “walk-in” patients in general health facilities [
43]. This seems to be partly due to the integration of mental health, among other things, to improving the quality of care offered to patients in a person-centred care approach [
43,
44]. Primary care providers report high partial or total remission rates (74%), but without providing clear objective criteria for this short-term remission. Conducting surveys involving patients undergoing treatment to obtain long-term follow-up data for these patients would make it possible to confirm (or not) these reported remission and/or recovery rates.
Of the people who used mental health services, the majority suffered from anxiety disorders (27.9%), depression (26.4%), and epilepsy (17.7%) in programme U; while the majority suffered from depression (35%), epilepsy (24.9%), and psychosis (24.9%) in programme R. In cases of depression, diagnosis is often made without distinction regarding the degree or type of disorder. The prevalence of depression is significantly higher than that found in general population studies published in a systematic review with meta-analysis of publications from five continents, estimated to be 18% [
45]. Could there be a diagnostic problem? It is possible that the tools used to diagnose mental health disorders are based on a categorical approach. It is not a scientifically correct to always classify people with similar symptoms but facing very different social, cultural, and/or economic situations (poverty or other financial problems, unemployment, interpersonal difficulties, and family violence, structural violence, community conflicts, migration, etc.) as presenting a single specific health problem [
46]. This counting of symptoms, without taking into account context and diagnostic heterogeneity [
47], may be at the root of the overestimation of cases of depression and perhaps other mental health disorders in the Congolese context. The same applies to the prescription of psychotropic drugs using protocolised solutions [
5]. Three out of ten people were affected by anxiety disorders in the urban environment of Lubumbashi. This may be explained by the fact that integration was launched during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the current lifestyle in both urban and rural areas of the DRC is likely to influence the increase in other significant mental health complaints, including stress and anxiety disorders. As a single pathological entity, they receive little attention in primary care settings. Would it not be appropriate to separately consider these other significant mental health complaints (i.e., anxiety disorders and stress disorders) so that they receive the attention they deserve during the mental health integration process? The high prevalence of psychoses in hospitals can be explained by the fact that these mental health disorders are the most prevalent in our context. Generally speaking, if financial resources are available, families and friends rush their loved ones to the hospital as soon as they realise that they are beginning to show signs of psychotic behaviour.
Of the patients treated in primary care facilities in the Tshamilemba health district, 100% received psychological interventions, 84.7% received pharmacological interventions, and 55.3% received social interventions (guidance, social support, accommodation, food, family mediation, etc.). These results support recruiting clinical psychologists at the first line of care. It is advisable that MNS disorders such as acute stress, intellectual disability, and mental and behavioural disorders in children and adolescents should not be the subject of medical prescriptions in primary care settings. Providers of progressive psychological interventions would therefore be invaluable. It has also been found that almost nine out of ten people are treated with medication. Is this due to over- or irrational prescription of psychotropic drugs? In a previous study [
5], we also observed that the psychiatric aspects of healthcare were given priority to the detriment of the psychological, sociocultural, and spiritual aspects of caring for people with mental health problems. Over-medicalisation risks have a considerable negative effect on the well-being of people who apparently require other investments from providers. In our experience of accompanying teams of primary care providers in the process of integrating mental health, we have often found that these health professionals sometimes find it difficult to look beyond what is recommended in management protocols. Furthermore, is it possible that over-prescription of drugs is linked to the commercialisation of mental healthcare in a context of shortage of psychotropic drugs? [
47].
Our results demonstrate that integrating mental health improves the functionality of the referral and counter-referral in health districts. From 2022 to 2024, the mental health referral rate in one health district increased from 0% at the start of the programme to 12.9% in 2024, while the counter-referral rate increased from 0% at the start of the programme to 3.5% in 2024. These results suggest that primary care providers are gradually recognising the importance of the continuum of care in the management of mental health problems [
48].
The results revealed that access to mental health services in the two health districts was gradually improving. At the health centre of Tshamilemba, in the Tshamilemba health district, 68.8% (22/32) were trained in mental health, including the use of the mhGAP-IG; while in the Mangembo health district, 8.9% (22/247) were trained. Note that in the Mangembo district, the programme is still in its second year out of the five planned. In Tshamilemba district, 1.8% (only 1 out of 55!) of the health facilities are supplied with essential medicines, compared with 47.4% (9/19) of health facilities in Mangembo. While these results are encouraging, major efforts are needed to cover all health districts. Well-trained human resources for health and the availability of quality medicines are two important building blocks of the (local) health system that are likely to support efforts to integrate mental health [
47]. It is known that healthcare facilities based in these local health systems cover about 80% of the population’s health needs [
13]. One of the best strategies for ensuring the availability of essential psychotropic medicines is to set up a drug credit line to support the primary care facilities that need them most.
Despite the efforts made in the two health districts in which the integration of mental health is being tested, the stigma attached to mental health remains strong. While some participants in the FGDs felt that people were no longer very afraid of people suffering from mental health problems, that they accepted that it was normal to develop these problems, and that they were prepared to take them to a healthcare establishment, others, on the other hand, said that people still believed that these patients were dangerous and that they could still reject them, calling for more awareness-raising initiatives. Indeed, the fear of social stigmatisation is still often reported by users of mental health services, all the more so when they attend “Western” healthcare facilities [
5]. This stigma remains one of the major obstacles to access to mental health services and is thought to be at the root of mistreatment and rejection of patients by those close to them (family, friends, employers, etc.) [
49]. It turns out that this social and/or structural stigma becomes even more problematic when it emanates from the providers themselves within health facilities [
50]. To significantly reduce mental health-related stigma, investing in community-based mental healthcare approaches is important.
Several lessons can be learned from these Congolese experiences of mental health integration that tested the WHO’s mhGAP, and some solutions have been proposed to promote its sustainability. However, to ensure greater sustainability, (local) health systems need to take on board the lessons learned from these experiences. The lessons appear to corroborate those of other experiences conducted in LMICs that tested the mhGAP [
51,
52]. These studies have learned that it is necessary to collaborate with local stakeholders. It is necessary to build on PHC systems to reach the most vulnerable groups of people with unmet needs. To identify people with (potential) mental health problems, it is important to use locally understandable concepts. Primary care providers must be adequately remunerated for the healthcare (including mental healthcare) they provide. It is appropriate to take advantage of the opportunities that arise in specific crisis situations to achieve integration, as was demonstrated in the case of Tshamilemba health centre facing COVID-19. However, care must be taken to ensure that integration measures introduced at the time of these crises are sustained.
The ambitious nature of the two programmes, which aimed to treat the seven common MNS disorders and provide up to 11 types of medication, but which were not commensurate with the financial and logistical resources deployed, would have led to minimal outcomes. We therefore suggest being very pragmatic in the choice of priorities when an integration programme is being considered and, for the two programmes currently underway, relegating certain MNS disorders that are infrequent in the context to the background, to devote the necessary energy to the disorders that are really a priority.
4.1. Study Strengths, Limitations, and Implications
This study has three main strengths. The first is the type of design used. Indeed, the multiple case study design is recognised as one of the most powerful in terms of generating solid evidence in the absence of quasi-experimental study designs [
25]. However, as multiple case study designs do not allow causal links to be measured, further research would ideally adopt more robust prospective designs with specific outcomes of interest being measured across different stakeholders. The second lies in the fact that it documents, for the first time to our knowledge, two experiences of “formal” integration of mental health services purposely guided by WHO’s mhGAP. Accordingly, these results stand a better chance of being comparable with those of studies carried out in similar contexts. Third, unlike other studies that only used secondary or primary data, this study used both primary and secondary data from different collection methods and sources. This triangulation allowed us to minimise information bias and thus improve the quality of the provided information.
However, there are two main limitations. First, with the available data, it was not possible to analyse the situation by distinct geographical health areas and establish where the patients using the Tshamilemba health centre actually come from. The same holds true for the Mangembo health district for programme R. Overall, the rates of use of curative mental health services remain low. It would have been worthwhile to monitor this utilisation over longer periods of time than was the case in the present study. The mhGAP tools used for analysing integration policies do, however, not address the reality of traditional healers providing mental healthcare. Given the fact that these traditional care providers are, and will, remain in the medium term an important source of mental healthcare for people (whatever the effectiveness of this source of care), it is justified to take them into account in future integration experiences. It may therefore be indicated to enrich the current mhGAP framework in that respect.
The results of this study raise several other issues that merit further consideration. First, it is important to thoroughly document the experiences so as to be able, eventually, to translate the findings into health policies. In a perspective of scaling up mental health services, there is need to map all the PHC facilities currently offering mental care, assess the level of integration, certify those that have reached the required level, and then raise the level of those in the process of integration. From there, a roadmap for the progressive integration of mental health can be established. Finally, it is necessary to introduce mhGAP-IG modules into the initial training curriculum for future primary care providers.
4.2. Reflexivity
During this study, one of researchers (EMM) was not entirely neutral. He was indeed involved in the action research process conducted at the health centre of Tshamilemba, as an external researcher. In addition, in his capacity as a senior manager at the DRC’s PNSM, he was also occasionally invited to take part in reflection sessions on the progress of the programme implemented at Mangembo (in programme R). These combined roles may have been a source of bias.