Acceptability of a Brief Web-Based Theory-Based Intervention to Prevent and Reduce Self-harm: Mixed Methods Evaluation

Chris Keyworth, Rory O'Connor, Leah Quinlivan, Christopher J Armitage, Chris Keyworth, Rory O'Connor, Leah Quinlivan, Christopher J Armitage

Abstract

Background: The volitional help sheet (VHS) for self-harm equips people with a means of responding automatically to triggers for self-harm with coping strategies. Although there is some evidence of its efficacy, improving acceptability and making the intervention available in a web-based format may be crucial to increasing effectiveness and reach.

Objective: This study aims to use the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) to explore the acceptability of the VHS, examine for whom and under what circumstances this intervention is more or less acceptable, and develop a series of recommendations for how the VHS can be used to support people in reducing repeat self-harm.

Methods: We explored acceptability in two phases. First, our patient and public involvement partners evaluated the original VHS from a lived experience perspective, which was subsequently translated into a web-based format. Second, a representative sample of adults in the United Kingdom who had previously self-harmed were recruited via a YouGov survey (N=514) and were asked to rate the acceptability of the VHS based on the seven constructs of the TFA, namely, affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, and self-efficacy. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, one-tailed t tests, and binary logistic regression. A directed content analysis approach was used to analyze qualitative data.

Results: Participants in the web-based survey rated the VHS as positive (affective attitude; t457=4.72; P<.001); were confident using it (self-efficacy; t457=9.54; P<.001); felt they did not have to give up any benefits, profits, or values when using it (opportunity costs; t439=-15.51; P<.001); understood it and how it worked (intervention coherence; t464=11.90; P<.001); and were confident that it would achieve its purpose (perceived effectiveness; t466=2.04; P=.04). The TFA domain burden appeared to be an important indicator of acceptability. Lower levels of perceived burden when using the VHS tool were more prevalent among younger adults aged 18-24 years (OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.50-8.78), people of White ethnic background (OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.06-8.613), and people without a long-term health condition (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.01-2.30). Perceived modifications to further improve acceptability included improved formatting (burden), the feature to add new situations and responses or amend existing ones (ethicality), and clearer instructions and further detail about the purpose of the VHS (intervention coherence).

Conclusions: Our findings show high levels of acceptability among some people who have previously self-harmed, particularly among younger adults, people of White ethnic backgrounds, and people without long-term health conditions. Future research should aim to improve acceptability among older adults, people from minority ethnic groups, and people with long-term health conditions.

Keywords: acceptability; digital health; implementation intentions; mental health; online; self-harm; volitional help sheet.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Chris Keyworth, Rory O'Connor, Leah Quinlivan, Christopher J Armitage. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 14.09.2021.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The volitional help sheet for self-harm.

References

    1. Hawton K, Bergen H, Casey D, Simkin S, Palmer B, Cooper J, Kapur N, Horrocks J, House A, Lilley R, Noble R, Owens D. Self-harm in England: a tale of three cities. Multicentre study of self-harm. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2007 Jul 21;42(7):513–21. doi: 10.1007/s00127-007-0199-7.
    1. Kapur N. Health services and suicide prevention. J Ment Health. 2009 Jul 06;18(1):1–5. doi: 10.1080/09638230802370704.
    1. Carr MJ, Ashcroft DM, Kontopantelis E, Awenat Y, Cooper J, Chew-Graham C, Kapur N, Webb RT. The epidemiology of self-harm in a UK-wide primary care patient cohort, 2001-2013. BMC Psychiatry. 2016 Feb 29;16(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s12888-016-0753-5. 10.1186/s12888-016-0753-5
    1. Department of Health Preventing suicide in England: Third progress report of the cross-government outcomes strategy to save lives. Department of Health. 2017. [2021-06-01]. .
    1. World Health Organization National suicide prevention strategies: progress, examples and indicators. World Health Organization. 2018. [2021-06-01]. .
    1. O'Connor RC, Wetherall K, Cleare S, Eschle S, Drummond J, Ferguson E, O'Connor DB, O'Carroll RE. Suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-harm: national prevalence study of young adults. BJPsych Open. 2018 May 09;4(3):142–8. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2018.14. S2056472418000145
    1. Hjelmeland H, Hawton K, Nordvik H, Bille-Brahe U, De Leo D, Fekete S, Grad O, Haring C, Kerkhof J, Lönnqvist J, Michel K, Renberg E, Schmidtke A, Van Heeringen K, Wasserman D. Why people engage in parasuicide: a cross-cultural study of intentions. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2002;32(4):380–93. doi: 10.1521/suli.32.4.380.22336.
    1. O'Connor RC, Smyth R, Ferguson E, Ryan C, Williams JM. Psychological processes and repeat suicidal behavior: a four-year prospective study. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2013 Dec;81(6):1137–43. doi: 10.1037/a0033751. 2013-25313-001
    1. Gollwitzer PM. Implementation intentions: strong effects of simple plans. Am Psychol. 1999;54(7):493–503. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.54.7.493.
    1. Gollwitzer P, Sheeran P. Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta‐analysis of effects and processes. Adv Experimet Soc Psychol. 2006;38:69–119. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1.
    1. Armitage CJ, Rahim WA, Rowe R, O'Connor RC. An exploratory randomised trial of a simple, brief psychological intervention to reduce subsequent suicidal ideation and behaviour in patients admitted to hospital for self-harm. Br J Psychiatry. 2016 May 02;208(5):470–6. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.162495.S000712500024378X
    1. Armitage CJ. A volitional help sheet to encourage smoking cessation: a randomized exploratory trial. Health Psychol. 2008 Sep;27(5):557–66. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.27.5.557.2008-13168-007
    1. O'Connor RC, Rasmussen S, Beautrais A. Recognition of suicide risk, crisis helplines, and psychosocial interventions: a selective review. In: O'Connor RC, Platt S, Gordon J, editors. International Handbook of Suicide Prevention: Research, Policy and Practice. London: Wiley Blackwell; 2011. pp. 435–56.
    1. Madge N, Hewitt A, Hawton K, de Wilde EJ, Corcoran P, Fekete S, van Heeringen K, De Leo D, Ystgaard M. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2008 Jun;49(6):667–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01879.x.JCPP1879
    1. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. J Consul Clin Psychol. 1983;51(3):390–5. doi: 10.1037/0022-006x.51.3.390.
    1. O'Connor RC, Ferguson E, Scott F, Smyth R, McDaid D, Park A, Beautrais A, Armitage CJ. A brief psychological intervention to reduce repetition of self-harm in patients admitted to hospital following a suicide attempt: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;4(6):451–60. doi: 10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30129-3.
    1. Diepeveen S, Ling T, Suhrcke M, Roland M, Marteau TM. Public acceptability of government intervention to change health-related behaviours: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 15;13(1):756. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-756. 1471-2458-13-756
    1. Hommel K, Hente E, Herzer M, Ingerski LM, Denson LA. Telehealth behavioral treatment for medication nonadherence: a pilot and feasibility study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 Apr;25(4):469–73. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0b013e32835c2a1b.
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O'Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, Baird J. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2015 Mar 19;350(mar19 6):h1258. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1258.
    1. Sekhon M, Cartwright M, Francis JJ. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 26;17(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8. 10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8
    1. Stok FM, de Ridder DT, de Vet E, Nureeva L, Luszczynska A, Wardle J, Gaspar T, de Wit JB. Hungry for an intervention? Adolescents' ratings of acceptability of eating-related intervention strategies. BMC Public Health. 2016 Jan 05;16(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2665-6. 10.1186/s12889-015-2665-6
    1. Sekhon M, Cartwright M, Francis J. Application of a theoretical framework to assess intervention acceptability: a semi-structured interview study. Eur Health Psychol. 2016;18:A.
    1. Armitage CJ. Randomized test of a brief psychological intervention to reduce and prevent emotional eating in a community sample. J Public Health (Oxf) 2015 Sep 01;37(3):438–44. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv054.fdv054
    1. UK Office for National Statistics Estimates of the population for the UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. UK Office for National Statistics. 2021. [2021-06-01]. .
    1. McManus S, Meltzer H, Brugha T, Bebbington PE, Jenkins R. Adult psychiatric morbidity in England: results of a household survey. Health and Social Care Information Centre. 2009. [2021-06-01]. .
    1. Dhingra K, Boduszek D, O'Connor Rory C. Differentiating suicide attempters from suicide ideators using the Integrated Motivational-Volitional model of suicidal behaviour. J Affect Disord. 2015 Nov 01;186:211–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.07.007.S0165-0327(15)30216-0
    1. O'Connor RC, Rasmussen S, Hawton K. Distinguishing adolescents who think about self-harm from those who engage in self-harm. Br J Psychiatry. 2012 Apr 02;200(4):330–5. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.111.097808.S0007125000079265
    1. Renko E, Knittle K, Palsola M, Lintunen T, Hankonen N. Acceptability, reach and implementation of a training to enhance teachers' skills in physical activity promotion. BMC Public Health. 2020 Oct 16;20(1):1568. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09653-x. 10.1186/s12889-020-09653-x
    1. McManus S, Gunnell D, Cooper C, Bebbington PE, Howard LM, Brugha T, Jenkins R, Hassiotis A, Weich S, Appleby L. Prevalence of non-suicidal self-harm and service contact in England, 2000-14: repeated cross-sectional surveys of the general population. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Jul;6(7):573–81. doi: 10.1016/s2215-0366(19)30188-9.
    1. Keyworth C, Epton T, Goldthorpe J, Calam R, Armitage CJ. Acceptability, reliability, and validity of a brief measure of capabilities, opportunities, and motivations ("COM-B") Br J Health Psychol. 2020 Sep 20;25(3):474–501. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12417.
    1. Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, O'Connor D, Patey A, Ivers N, Foy R, Duncan EM, Colquhoun H, Grimshaw JM, Lawton R, Michie S. A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci. 2017 Jun 21;12(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9. 10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9
    1. Murphy A, Gardner DM. Pharmacists' acceptability of a men's mental health promotion program using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. AIMS Public Health. 2019;6(2):195–208. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2019.2.195. publichealth-06-02-195
    1. McManus S, Bebbington P, Jenkins R, Brugha T. Mental health and wellbeing in England: Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2014. NHS Digital. 2016. [2021-06-01]. .
    1. Naylor C, Parsonage M, McDaid D, Knapp M, Fossey M, Galea A. Long-term conditions and mental health: the cost of co-morbidities. The Kings Fund. [2021-06-01]. .
    1. Cotter AP, Durant N, Agne AA, Cherrington AL. Internet interventions to support lifestyle modification for diabetes management: a systematic review of the evidence. J Diabetes Complications. 2014 Mar;28(2):243–51. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2013.07.003. S1056-8727(13)00165-7
    1. Bundy C, Pinder B, Bucci S, Reeves D, Griffiths C, Tarrier N. A novel, web-based, psychological intervention for people with psoriasis: the electronic Targeted Intervention for Psoriasis (eTIPs) study. Br J Dermatol. 2013 Aug 13;169(2):329–36. doi: 10.1111/bjd.12350.
    1. Berry N, Lobban F, Emsley R, Bucci S. Acceptability of interventions delivered online and through mobile phones for people who experience severe mental health problems: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 31;18(5):e121. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5250. v18i5e121
    1. Shaw S, Wherton J, Vijayaraghavan S, Morris J, Bhattacharya S, Hanson P, Campbell-Richards D, Ramoutar S, Collard A, Hodkinson I, Greenhalgh T. Advantages and limitations of virtual online consultations in a NHS acute trust: the VOCAL mixed-methods study. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2018;6(21):1–162.
    1. Murphy M, Scott LJ, Salisbury C, Turner A, Scott A, Denholm R, Lewis R, Iyer G, Macleod J, Horwood J. Implementation of remote consulting in UK primary care following the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods longitudinal study. Br J Gen Pract. 2021 Jan 17;71(704):166–77. doi: 10.3399/bjgp.2020.0948.
    1. Leather JZ, O'Connor RC, Quinlivan L, Kapur N, Campbell S, Armitage CJ. Healthcare professionals' implementation of national guidelines with patients who self-harm. J Psychiatr Res. 2020 Nov;130:405–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.08.031. S0022-3956(20)30943-2
    1. Mughal F, Troya MI, Dikomitis L, Chew-Graham CA, Corp N, Babatunde OO. Role of the GP in the management of patients with self-harm behaviour: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2020 Feb 10;70(694):364–73. doi: 10.3399/bjgp20x708257.
    1. Geulayov G, Casey D, McDonald KC, Foster P, Pritchard K, Wells C, Clements C, Kapur N, Ness J, Waters K, Hawton K. Incidence of suicide, hospital-presenting non-fatal self-harm, and community-occurring non-fatal self-harm in adolescents in England (the iceberg model of self-harm): a retrospective study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Feb;5(2):167–74. doi: 10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30478-9.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit