The national mental health programme in the United Republic of Tanzania. A report from WHO and DANIDA.

This is the terminal report on the pilot implementation phase of the national mental health programme in the United Republic of Tanzania which was carried out as a cooperative venture between the Government of Tanzania, the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA), and the World Health Organization (WHO). Although Tanzania had already achieved wide coverage of its population through a decentralized and easily accessible system of primary health care facilities providing the most essential services, its mental health services were poorly staffed and concentrated in a few custodial-type institutions and out-patient departments hardly capable of ensuring even one contact per year to about one-fifth of the estimated 100,000 severely mentally ill adults and 37,000 children in need of care at any given point in time. The programme design, developed jointly by the three parties involved, aimed to take full advantage of Tanzania's existing primary health care infrastructure by integrating mental health into the general health services of the country, including the 'grassroot' level of the services in the village and the district. The objectives guiding the new programme were: (i) to create an infrastructure for mental health care provision which should meet the requirements of both adequate population coverage and quality of service; (ii) to raise the community's awareness of mental health issues (including informing the community on the availability of effective means to deal with specific problems) and thus enlist its support and participation. The essential features of the adopted strategy were as follows. 1. Mental health care provision was conceived as a sub-system within the health care system, extending from rural health posts and dispensaries through rural health centres to district and regional hospitals. While full integration of mental health care within the general functions of the health workers was sought at the village and dispensary level (first echelon of care), relative differentiation and identity of mental health services were considered necessary at the district and regional levels (the second echelon). Tasks appropriate to each level of care were defined in operational terms and referral pathways were designated to enable the unobstructed access of the patient to more specialized diagnostic or therapeutic services if the problem was not within the competence of the more peripheral level. These pathways were also used in reverse when, following assessment or treatment, a patient was discharged back to the rural service with appropriate instructions about maintenance treatment and aftercare.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)