Russia’s war against Ukraine (February 2022 – ongoing) has generated a large-scale humanitarian emergency characterized by widespread trauma, prolonged uncertainty, and mass displacement. In contrast to prior conflicts, it has been marked by nationwide attacks, urbanized warfare, digitally mediated trauma exposure, and societal fragmentation – factors that have created extensive mental health needs and prompted the rapid launch of diverse mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions. The objective of this scoping review is to identify and describe MHPSS interventions implemented for residents of Ukraine affected by the war. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Studies were eligible if they reported such interventions implemented from February 2022 through to the search date. A substantial body of evidence was identified, capturing a diverse landscape of mental health supports. Study designs were heterogeneous but dominated by early-stage evaluations, particularly single-group pre–post studies, with few controlled trials. Interventions addressed diverse war-affected populations, including displaced civilians, children and adolescents, military personnel, caregivers/families, and mental-health treatment providers and educators. Programs clustered into six categories: digital mental health, trauma-focused therapies, low-intensity psychosocial interventions, creative/play-based approaches, multimodal rehabilitation, and workforce capacity-building. The most common clinical targets were anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and stress. This scoping review maps a rapidly expanding, digitally enabled, multitiered MHPSS landscape for war-affected residents of Ukraine, characterized by scalable delivery and adaptation of evidence-based models. However, the evidence base remains largely early-stage, with limited long-term evaluation and persistent gaps for underserved populations, highlighting the prolonged psychological consequences of ongoing war.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kudar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: