David Daniel Ebert1, Marvin Franke1, Fanny Kählke1, Ann-Marie Küchler2, Ronny Bruffaerts3, Philippe Mortier4, Eirini Karyotaki5, Jordi Alonso6, Pim Cuijpers5, Matthias Berking1, Randy P Auerbach7, Ronald C Kessler8, Harald Baumeister2. 1. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. 2. Department for Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany. 3. Public Health Psychiatry, KU Leuven; Universitair Psychiatrisch Centrum KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Research Group Psychiatry, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven University, Leuven, Belgium. 5. Department of Clinical Psychology, VU Amsterdam and Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Health Services Research Unit, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain; Pompeu Fabra University (UPF), Barcelona, Spain; CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain. 7. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, USA; Division of Clinical Developmental Neuroscience, Sackler Institute, New York, New York. 8. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The majority of university students with mental health problems are untreated. Only a small empirical literature exists on strategies to increase mental health service use. AIMS: To investigate the effects and moderators of a brief acceptance-facilitating intervention on intention to use mental health services among university students. METHOD: Within the German site of the World Health Organization's World Mental Health International College Student (WMH-ICS) initiative, 1,374 university students were randomized to an intervention condition (IC; n = 664) or a control condition (CC; n = 710) that was implemented in the survey itself. Both conditions received the questions assessing mental disorders and suicidality that were included in other WMH-ICS surveys. The IC group then additionally received: Internet-based personalized feedback based on subject symptom severity in the domains of depression, anxiety, substance use, suicidal thoughts and behaviors, and nonsuicidal self-injury; psychoeducation tailored to the personal symptom profile; and information about available university and community mental health services. The primary outcome was reported intention to use psychological interventions in the next semester, which was the last question in the survey. A broad range of potential moderating factors was explored. RESULTS: There was a significant main effect of the intervention with students randomized to IC, reporting significantly higher intentions to seek help in the next semester than students in the CC condition (d = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.23). Moderator analyses indicated that the intervention was more effective among students that fulfilled the criteria for lifetime (d = 0.34; 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.7) and 12-month panic-disorder (d = 0.32; 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.74) compared with those without lifetime (d = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.22) or 12-month panic disorder (d = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.22), students with lower (d = 0.37; 95% CI: -0.77 to 1.51) than higher (d = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.36 to 0.34) self-reported physical health, and students with nonheterosexual (d = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.67) compared with heterosexual (d = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.17) sexual orientation. The intervention had no effects among students who reported that they recognized that they had an emotional problem and "are already working actively to change it" (Stage 4 "stages of change"). CONCLUSIONS: A simple acceptance-facilitating intervention can increase intention to use mental health services, although effects, are on average, small. Future studies should investigate more personalized approaches with interventions tailored to barriers and clinical characteristics of students. In order to optimize intervention effects, the development and evaluation should be realized in designs that are powered to allow incremental value of different intervention components and tailoring strategies to be evaluated, such as in multiphase optimization designs.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The majority of university students with mental health problems are untreated. Only a small empirical literature exists on strategies to increase mental health service use. AIMS: To investigate the effects and moderators of a brief acceptance-facilitating intervention on intention to use mental health services among university students. METHOD: Within the German site of the World Health Organization's World Mental Health International College Student (WMH-ICS) initiative, 1,374 university students were randomized to an intervention condition (IC; n = 664) or a control condition (CC; n = 710) that was implemented in the survey itself. Both conditions received the questions assessing mental disorders and suicidality that were included in other WMH-ICS surveys. The IC group then additionally received: Internet-based personalized feedback based on subject symptom severity in the domains of depression, anxiety, substance use, suicidal thoughts and behaviors, and nonsuicidal self-injury; psychoeducation tailored to the personal symptom profile; and information about available university and community mental health services. The primary outcome was reported intention to use psychological interventions in the next semester, which was the last question in the survey. A broad range of potential moderating factors was explored. RESULTS: There was a significant main effect of the intervention with students randomized to IC, reporting significantly higher intentions to seek help in the next semester than students in the CC condition (d = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.23). Moderator analyses indicated that the intervention was more effective among students that fulfilled the criteria for lifetime (d = 0.34; 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.7) and 12-month panic-disorder (d = 0.32; 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.74) compared with those without lifetime (d = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.22) or 12-month panic disorder (d = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.22), students with lower (d = 0.37; 95% CI: -0.77 to 1.51) than higher (d = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.36 to 0.34) self-reported physical health, and students with nonheterosexual (d = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.67) compared with heterosexual (d = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.17) sexual orientation. The intervention had no effects among students who reported that they recognized that they had an emotional problem and "are already working actively to change it" (Stage 4 "stages of change"). CONCLUSIONS: A simple acceptance-facilitating intervention can increase intention to use mental health services, although effects, are on average, small. Future studies should investigate more personalized approaches with interventions tailored to barriers and clinical characteristics of students. In order to optimize intervention effects, the development and evaluation should be realized in designs that are powered to allow incremental value of different intervention components and tailoring strategies to be evaluated, such as in multiphase optimization designs.
Authors: Noel T Brewer; Gretchen B Chapman; Frederick X Gibbons; Meg Gerrard; Kevin D McCaul; Neil D Weinstein Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Cheryl A King; Daniel Eisenberg; Kai Zheng; Ewa Czyz; Anne Kramer; Adam Horwitz; Stephen Chermack Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2015-02-16
Authors: Melissa K Y Chan; Henna Bhatti; Nick Meader; Sarah Stockton; Jonathan Evans; Rory C O'Connor; Nav Kapur; Tim Kendall Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Martin P Eccles; Susan Hrisos; Jill Francis; Eileen F Kaner; Heather O Dickinson; Fiona Beyer; Marie Johnston Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2006-11-21 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Chelsey R Wilks; Randy P Auerbach; Jordi Alonso; Corina Benjet; Ronny Bruffaerts; Pim Cuijpers; David D Ebert; Jennifer G Green; Claude A Mellins; Philippe Mortier; Ekaterina Sadikova; Nancy A Sampson; Ronald C Kessler Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Pim Cuijpers; Randy P Auerbach; Corina Benjet; Ronny Bruffaerts; David Ebert; Eirini Karyotaki; Ronald C Kessler Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: David Daniel Ebert; Philippe Mortier; Fanny Kaehlke; Ronny Bruffaerts; Harald Baumeister; Randy P Auerbach; Jordi Alonso; Gemma Vilagut; Kalina I Martínez; Christine Lochner; Pim Cuijpers; Ann-Marie Kuechler; Jennifer Green; Penelope Hasking; Coral Lapsley; Nancy A Sampson; Ronald C Kessler Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Jennifer Apolinário-Hagen; Severin Hennemann; Christina Kück; Alexandra Wodner; Dorota Geibel; Marlies Riebschläger; Martin Zeißler; Bernhard Breil Journal: Health Serv Insights Date: 2020-03-13
Authors: Ann-Marie Küchler; Dana Schultchen; Olga Pollatos; Morten Moshagen; David D Ebert; Harald Baumeister Journal: Trials Date: 2020-11-26 Impact factor: 2.279