Peer-Presented Versus Mental Health Service Provider-Presented Mental Health Outreach Programs for University Students: Randomized Controlled Trial

Laurianne Bastien, Bilun Naz Boke, Jessica Mettler, Stephanie Zito, Lina Di Genova, Vera Romano, Stephen P Lewis, Rob Whitley, Srividya N Iyer, Nancy L Heath, Laurianne Bastien, Bilun Naz Boke, Jessica Mettler, Stephanie Zito, Lina Di Genova, Vera Romano, Stephen P Lewis, Rob Whitley, Srividya N Iyer, Nancy L Heath

Abstract

Background: University students are reporting concerning levels of mental health distress and challenges. University mental health service provider initiatives have been shown to be effective in supporting students' mental health, but these services are often resource-intensive. Consequently, new approaches to service delivery, such as web-based and peer support initiatives, have emerged as cost-effective and efficient approaches to support university students. However, these approaches have not been sufficiently evaluated for effectiveness or acceptability in university student populations.

Objective: Thus, the overarching goal of this study was to evaluate a mental health service provider-presented versus peer-presented web-based mental health resilience-building video outreach program against a wait-list comparison group.

Methods: Participants were 217 undergraduate students (mean age 20.44, SD 1.98 years; 171/217, 78.8% women) who were randomly assigned to one of the intervention groups (mental health service provider-presented: 69/217, 31.8%; peer-presented: 73/217, 33.6%) or the wait-list comparison group (75/217, 34.6%). Participants in the intervention groups were asked to watch 3 brief skill-building videos addressing strategies for building mental health resilience, whereas the comparison group was wait-listed. The mental health service provider-presented and peer-presented video series were identical in content, with presenters using a script to ensure consistency across delivery methods, but the videos differed in that they were either presented by mental health service providers or university students (peers). All participants were asked to complete web-based self-report measures of stress, coping self-efficacy, social support, social connectedness, mindfulness, and quality of life at baseline (time 1), 6 weeks later (time 2, after the intervention), and 1-month follow-up (time 3).

Results: Results from a series of 2-way ANOVAs found no significant differences in outcomes among any of the 3 groups. Surprisingly, a main effect of time revealed that all students improved on several well-being outcomes. In addition, results for program satisfaction revealed that both the mental health service provider-presented and peer-presented programs were rated very highly and at comparable levels.

Conclusions: Thus, findings suggest that a web-based mental health resilience-building video outreach program may be acceptable for university students regardless of it being mental health service provider-presented or peer-presented. Furthermore, the overall increases in well-being across groups, which coincided with the onset and early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, suggest an unexpected pattern of response among university students to the early period of the pandemic. Limitations and barriers as well as research implications are discussed.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05454592; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT05454592.

Keywords: mental health; mental health service provider–presented; outreach; peer-presented; randomized controlled trial; resilience; resilience building; service provider; student; university student; web-based mental health outreach.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Laurianne Bastien, Bilun Naz Boke, Jessica Mettler, Stephanie Zito, Lina Di Genova, Vera Romano, Stephen P Lewis, Rob Whitley, Srividya N Iyer, Nancy L Heath. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 22.07.2022.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Project timeline for the stress and coping web-based outreach program.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Attrition and exclusion of participants. MHSP: mental health service provider.
Figure 3
Figure 3
University students’ reported coping self-efficacy over time. Main effect of time represents a significant difference between time 1 and time 2 as well as between time 1 and time 3. CSE: Coping Self-Efficacy Scale; MHSP: mental health service provider.
Figure 4
Figure 4
University students’ reported mindfulness over time. Main effect of time represents a significant difference between time 1 and time 2 as well as between time 1 and time 3. MAAS: Mindful Attention Awareness Scale; MHSP: mental health service provider.
Figure 5
Figure 5
University students’ reported quality of life (QoL; environment) over time. Main effect of time represents a significant difference between time 1 and time 3. MHSP: mental health service provider.
Figure 6
Figure 6
University students’ reported social support over time. Main effect of time represents a significant difference between time 1 and time 2 as well as between time 2 and time 3. MHSP: mental health service provider; MSPSS: Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support.
Figure 7
Figure 7
University students’ reported quality of life (QoL; social relationships) over time. Main effect of time represents a significant difference between time 1 and time 2 as well as between time 2 and time 3. MHSP: mental health service provider.

References

    1. American College Health Association. Silver Spring, MD, USA: American College Health Association; 2019. [2020-03-11]. American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment II: Canadian Consortium Executive Summary Spring 2019. .
    1. Matthews M. A Review of Mental Health Services Offered by Canada's English language Universities. Western University. 2017. [2021-06-21]. .
    1. Making the Case for Investing in Mental Health in Canada. Mental Health Commission of Canada. 2016. [2020-03-11]. .
    1. Watkins DC, Hunt JB, Eisenberg D. Increased demand for mental health services on college campuses: perspectives from administrators. Qual Soc Work. 2011 Aug 09;11(3):319–37. doi: 10.1177/1473325011401468.
    1. Ali K, Farrer L, Gulliver A, Griffiths KM. Online peer-to-peer support for young people with mental health problems: a systematic review. JMIR Ment Health. 2015 May 19;2(2):e19. doi: 10.2196/mental.4418. v2i2e19
    1. Byrom N. An evaluation of a peer support intervention for student mental health. J Ment Health. 2018 Jun;27(3):240–6. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2018.1437605.
    1. Cyr C, Mckee H, O'Hagan M, Priest R. Making the case for peer support. Mental Health Commission of Canada. 2016. Jul, [2020-04-21]. .
    1. Fortuna KL, Naslund JA, LaCroix JM, Bianco CL, Brooks JM, Zisman-Ilani Y, Muralidharan A, Deegan P. Digital peer support mental health interventions for people with a lived experience of a serious mental illness: systematic review. JMIR Ment Health. 2020 Apr 03;7(4):e16460. doi: 10.2196/16460. v7i4e16460
    1. Arnett JJ. Emerging adulthood. A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. Am Psychol. 2000 May;55(5):469–80.
    1. Sussman S, Arnett JJ. Emerging adulthood: developmental period facilitative of the addictions. Eval Health Prof. 2014 Jun;37(2):147–55. doi: 10.1177/0163278714521812.0163278714521812
    1. Arnett JJ. Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from the Late Teens Through the Twenties. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2014.
    1. Arnett JJ, Žukauskienė R, Sugimura K. The new life stage of emerging adulthood at ages 18-29 years: implications for mental health. Lancet Psychiatry. 2014 Dec;1(7):569–76. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00080-7.S2215-0366(14)00080-7
    1. Schiller M, Hammen CC, Shahar G. Links among the self, stress, and psychological distress during emerging adulthood: comparing three theoretical models. Self Identity. 2016 Feb 23;15(3):302–26. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2015.1131736.
    1. Strengthening resilience: a priority shared by health 2020 and the and the sustainable development goals. World Health Organization. 2017. [2022-05-27]. .
    1. Regehr C, Glancy D, Pitts A. Interventions to reduce stress in university students: a review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2013 May 15;148(1):1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.11.026.S0165-0327(12)00779-3
    1. Biasi V, Patrizi N, Mosca M, De Vincenzo C. The effectiveness of university counselling for improving academic outcomes and well-being. Br J Guid Couns. 2016 Dec 03;45(3):248–57. doi: 10.1080/03069885.2016.1263826.
    1. Vescovelli F, Melani P, Ruini C, Ricci Bitti PE, Monti F. University counseling service for improving students' mental health. Psychol Serv. 2017 Nov;14(4):470–80. doi: 10.1037/ser0000166.2017-49948-008
    1. Salganik MJ. Bit by Bit: Social Research in the Digital Age. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press; 2019.
    1. Chan JK, Farrer LM, Gulliver A, Bennett K, Griffiths KM. University students' views on the perceived benefits and drawbacks of seeking help for mental health problems on the internet: a qualitative study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2016 Jan 19;3(1):e3. doi: 10.2196/humanfactors.4765. v3i1e3
    1. Irish M, Kuso S, Simek M, Zeiler M, Potterton R, Musiat P, Nitsch M, Wagner G, Karwautz A, Bolinski F, Karyotaki E, Rovira CS, Etchemendy E, Herrero R, Mira A, Cormo G, Baños R, Garcia-Palacios A, Ebert DD, Franke M, Zarski AC, Weisel K, Berger T, Dey M, Schaub MP, Jacobi C, Botella C, Oliver E, Gordon G, Spencer L, Waldherr K, Schmidt U. Online prevention programmes for university students: stakeholder perspectives from six European countries. Eur J Public Health. 2021 Jul 07;31(31 Suppl 1):i64–70. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckab040. 6317464
    1. Clarke AM, Kuosmanen T, Barry MM. A systematic review of online youth mental health promotion and prevention interventions. J Youth Adolesc. 2015 Jan;44(1):90–113. doi: 10.1007/s10964-014-0165-0.
    1. Harrer M, Adam SH, Fleischmann RJ, Baumeister H, Auerbach R, Bruffaerts R, Cuijpers P, Kessler RC, Berking M, Lehr D, Ebert DD. Effectiveness of an Internet- and app-based intervention for college students with elevated stress: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Apr 23;20(4):e136. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9293. v20i4e136
    1. Garrido S, Millington C, Cheers D, Boydell K, Schubert E, Meade T, Nguyen QV. What works and what doesn't work? A systematic review of digital mental health interventions for depression and anxiety in young people. Front Psychiatry. 2019 Nov 13;10:759. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00759. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00759.
    1. Lattie EG, Adkins EC, Winquist N, Stiles-Shields C, Wafford QE, Graham AK. Digital mental health interventions for depression, anxiety, and enhancement of psychological well-being among college students: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jul 22;21(7):e12869. doi: 10.2196/12869. v21i7e12869
    1. Repper J, Carter T. A review of the literature on peer support in mental health services. J Ment Health. 2011 Aug;20(4):392–411. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2011.583947.
    1. Davidson L, Bellamy C, Guy K, Miller R. Peer support among persons with severe mental illnesses: a review of evidence and experience. World Psychiatry. 2012 Jun;11(2):123–8. doi: 10.1016/j.wpsyc.2012.05.009.
    1. Goodwin J, Behan L, Kelly P, McCarthy K, Horgan A. Help-seeking behaviors and mental well-being of first year undergraduate university students. Psychiatry Res. 2016 Dec 30;246:129–35. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2016.09.015.S0165-1781(16)30355-9
    1. Lannin DG, Barrowclough M, Vogel DL. An examination of help-seeking preferences via best-worst scaling. J Clin Psychol. 2020 Sep;76(9):1677–95. doi: 10.1002/jclp.22945.
    1. Montagni I, Tzourio C, Cousin T, Sagara JA, Bada-Alonzi J, Horgan A. Mental health-related digital use by university students: a systematic review. Telemed J E Health. 2020 Feb;26(2):131–46. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2018.0316.
    1. Nicholas J, Boydell K, Christensen H. mHealth in psychiatry: time for methodological change. Evid Based Ment Health. 2016 May;19(2):33–4. doi: 10.1136/eb-2015-102278.eb-2015-102278
    1. Baum F, MacDougall C, Smith D. Participatory action research. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 Oct;60(10):854–7. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.028662. 60/10/854
    1. Macaulay AC, Commanda LE, Freeman WL, Gibson N, McCabe ML, Robbins CM, Twohig PL. Participatory research maximises community and lay involvement. North American Primary Care Research Group. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):774–8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.774.
    1. Bajaj B, Pande N. Mediating role of resilience in the impact of mindfulness on life satisfaction and affect as indices of subjective well-being. Pers Individ Dif. 2016 Apr;93:63–7. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.005.
    1. Cosco TD, Kaushal A, Richards M, Kuh D, Stafford M. Resilience measurement in later life: a systematic review and psychometric analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Jan 28;14:16. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0418-6. 10.1186/s12955-016-0418-6
    1. Polk LV. Toward a middle-range theory of resilience. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1997 Mar;19(3):1–13. doi: 10.1097/00012272-199703000-00002.
    1. Sanderson B, Brewer M. What do we know about student resilience in health professional education? A scoping review of the literature. Nurse Educ Today. 2017 Nov;58:65–71. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.07.018.S0260-6917(17)30180-6
    1. Thompson G, McBride RB, Hosford CC, Halaas G. Resilience among medical students: the role of coping style and social support. Teach Learn Med. 2016;28(2):174–82. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2016.1146611.
    1. Wilson CJ, Deane FP, Ciarrochi JV, Rickwood D. Measuring help seeking intentions: Properties of the General Help Seeking Questionnaire. University of Wollongong. 2005. [2020-03-11]. .
    1. Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ. 2005 Apr 09;330(7495):843. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7495.843. 330/7495/843
    1. Scott NW, McPherson GC, Ramsay CR, Campbell MK. The method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials. A review. Control Clin Trials. 2002 Dec;23(6):662–74. doi: 10.1016/s0197-2456(02)00242-8.S0197245602002428
    1. Son C, Hegde S, Smith A, Wang X, Sasangohar F. Effects of COVID-19 on college students' mental health in the United States: interview survey study. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Sep 03;22(9):e21279. doi: 10.2196/21279. v22i9e21279
    1. Kirkpatrick JD, Kirkpatrick WK. Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Training Evaluation. Alexandria, VA, USA: Association for Talent Development; 2016.
    1. Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983 Dec;24(4):385–96.
    1. Cohen S. Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States. In: Spacapan S, Oskamp S, editors. The Social Psychology of Health: The Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology. New York, NY, USA: Sage Publications; 1988. pp. 31–67.
    1. Roberti JW, Harrington LN, Storch EA. Further psychometric support for the 10-item version of the Perceived Stress Scale. J Coll Couns. 2006;9(2):135–47. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1882.2006.tb00100.x.
    1. Chesney AM, Neilands TB, Chambers DB, Taylor JM, Folkman S. A validity and reliability study of the coping self-efficacy scale. Br J Health Psychol. 2006 Sep;11(Pt 3):421–37. doi: 10.1348/135910705X53155.
    1. Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. J Pers Assess. 1988 Mar;52(1):30–41. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2.
    1. Zimet GD, Powell SS, Farley GK, Werkman S, Berkoff KA. Psychometric characteristics of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess. 1990;55(3-4):610–7. doi: 10.1080/00223891.1990.9674095.
    1. Lee RM, Draper M, Lee S. Social connectedness, dysfunctional interpersonal behaviors, and psychological distress: testing a mediator model. J Couns Psychol. 2001;48(3):310–8. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.48.3.310.
    1. Brown KW, Ryan RM. The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Apr;84(4):822–48. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822.
    1. MacKillop J, Anderson EJ. Further psychometric validation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2007 May 22;29(4):289–93. doi: 10.1007/s10862-007-9045-1.
    1. The WHOQOL Group Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. The WHOQOL Group. Psychol Med. 1998 May;28(3):551–8. doi: 10.1017/s0033291798006667.
    1. Vahedi S. World Health Organization Quality-of-Life Scale (WHOQOL-BREF): analyses of their item response theory properties based on the graded responses model. Iran J Psychiatry. 2010;5(4):140–53.
    1. Conley CS, Durlak JA, Kirsch AC. A meta-analysis of universal mental health prevention programs for higher education students. Prev Sci. 2015 May;16(4):487–507. doi: 10.1007/s11121-015-0543-1.
    1. Rith-Najarian LR, Boustani MM, Chorpita BF. A systematic review of prevention programs targeting depression, anxiety, and stress in university students. J Affect Disord. 2019 Oct 01;257:568–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.06.035.S0165-0327(18)32754-X
    1. Spijkerman MP, Pots WT, Bohlmeijer ET. Effectiveness of online mindfulness-based interventions in improving mental health: a review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Apr;45:102–14. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2016.03.009. S0272-7358(15)30062-3
    1. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175–91. doi: 10.3758/bf03193146.
    1. Fall 2020 Admissions*. McGill University — Enrolment Services. 2020. [2022-05-27]. .
    1. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 6th edition. Boston, MA, USA: Pearson Education; 2007.
    1. Rickwood D, Wallace A, Kennedy V, O'Sullivan S, Telford N, Leicester S. Young people's satisfaction with the online mental health service eheadspace: development and implementation of a service satisfaction measure. JMIR Ment Health. 2019 Apr 17;6(4):e12169. doi: 10.2196/12169. v6i4e12169
    1. Charles NE, Strong SJ, Burns LC, Bullerjahn MR, Serafine KM. Increased mood disorder symptoms, perceived stress, and alcohol use among college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Res. 2021 Feb;296:113706. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113706. S0165-1781(21)00003-2
    1. Amanvermez Y, Rahmadiana M, Karyotaki E, de Wit L, Ebert DD, Kessler RC, Cuijpers P. Stress management interventions for college students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Sci Pract (forthcoming) 2020 May 22;:e12342. doi: 10.1111/cpsp.12342.
    1. Conley CS, Durlak JA, Shapiro JB, Kirsch AC, Zahniser E. A meta-analysis of the impact of universal and indicated preventive technology-delivered interventions for higher education students. Prev Sci. 2016 Aug;17(6):659–78. doi: 10.1007/s11121-016-0662-3.10.1007/s11121-016-0662-3
    1. Hamza CA, Ewing L, Heath NL, Goldstein AL. When social isolation is nothing new: a longitudinal study on psychological distress during COVID-19 among university students with and without preexisting mental health concerns. Can Psychol. 2021 Feb;62(1):20–30. doi: 10.1037/cap0000255.
    1. Antonova E, Schlosser K, Pandey R, Kumari V. Coping with COVID-19: mindfulness-based approaches for mitigating mental health crisis. Front Psychiatry. 2021 Mar 23;12:563417. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.563417. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.563417.
    1. Weis R, Ray SD, Cohen TA. Mindfulness as a way to cope with COVID‐19‐related stress and anxiety. Couns Psychother Res. 2021 Mar;21(1):8–18. doi: 10.1002/capr.12375.
    1. Huckins JF, daSilva AW, Wang W, Hedlund E, Rogers C, Nepal SK, Wu J, Obuchi M, Murphy EI, Meyer ML, Wagner DD, Holtzheimer PE, Campbell AT. Mental health and behavior of college students during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: longitudinal smartphone and ecological momentary assessment study. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jun 17;22(6):e20185. doi: 10.2196/20185. v22i6e20185
    1. Kaparounaki CK, Patsali ME, Mousa DP, Papadopoulou EV, Papadopoulou KK, Fountoulakis KN. University students' mental health amidst the COVID-19 quarantine in Greece. Psychiatry Res. 2020 Aug;290:113111. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113111. S0165-1781(20)31413-X
    1. Karlin NJ, Marrow S, Weil J, Baum S, Spencer TS. Social support, mood, and resiliency following a Peruvian natural disaster. J Loss Trauma. 2012 Sep;17(5):470–88. doi: 10.1080/15325024.2012.665019.
    1. Madsen W, O'Mullan C. Perceptions of community resilience after natural disaster in a rural Australian town. J Community Psychol. 2016 Mar 09;44(3):277–92. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21764.
    1. Tull MT, Edmonds KA, Scamaldo KM, Richmond JR, Rose JP, Gratz KL. Psychological outcomes associated with stay-at-home orders and the perceived impact of COVID-19 on daily life. Psychiatry Res. 2020 Jul;289:113098. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113098. S0165-1781(20)31085-4

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다