Effectiveness of Live Health Professional-Led Group eHealth Interventions for Adult Mental Health: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had adverse impacts on mental health and substance use worldwide. Systematic reviews suggest eHealth interventions can be effective at addressing these problems. However, strong positive eHealth outcomes are often tied to the intensity of web-based therapist guidance, which has time and cost implications that can make the population scale-up of more effective interventions difficult. A way to offset cost while maintaining the intensity of therapist guidance is to offer eHealth programs to groups rather than more standard one-on-one formats. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to assess experimental evidence for the effectiveness of live health professional-led group eHealth interventions on mental health, substance use, or bereavement among community-dwelling adults. Within the articles selected for our primary aim, we also seek to examine the impact of interventions that encourage physical activity compared with those that do not. METHODS: Overall, 4 databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library) were searched in July 2020. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of eHealth interventions led by health professionals and delivered entirely to adult groups by videoconference, teleconference, or webchat. Eligible studies reported mental health, substance use, or bereavement as primary outcomes. The results were examined by outcome, eHealth platform, and intervention length. Postintervention data were used to calculate effect size by study. The findings were summarized using the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool. RESULTS: Of the 4099 identified studies, 21 (0.51%) RCTs representing 20 interventions met the inclusion criteria. These studies examined mental health outcomes among 2438 participants (sample size range: 47-361 participants per study) across 7 countries. When effect sizes were pooled, live health professional-led group eHealth interventions had a medium effect on reducing anxiety compared with inactive (Cohen d=0.57) or active control (Cohen d=0.48), a medium to small effect on reducing depression compared with inactive (Cohen d=0.61) or active control (Cohen d=0.21), and mixed effects on mental distress and coping. Interventions led by videoconference, and those that provided 8-12 hours of live health professional-led group contact had more robust effects on adult mental health. Risk of bias was high in 91% (19/21) of the studies. Heterogeneity across interventions was significant, resulting in low to very low quality of evidence. No eligible RCT was found that examined substance use, bereavement, or physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Live eHealth group interventions led by health professionals can foster moderate improvements in anxiety and moderate to small improvements in depression among community-based adults, particularly those delivered by videoconference and those providing 8-12 hours of synchronous engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020187551; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=187551. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13643-020-01479-3.

Trauma-informed interventions versus control for cancer-risk behaviours among adults: rationale and design for a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use, alcohol use, and sugar-sweetened beverage consumption are each associated with increased cancer-risk. Psychological trauma is a common experience and a key driver of these behaviours among adults. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of trauma-informed yoga, drumming, and psychoeducation compared to control on tobacco use, alcohol use, and sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among community-based adults. Secondary aims are to evaluate the effect of these interventions compared to control on psychological and physiological stress symptomology, social connection, and coping behaviour. METHODS: Recruitment for this single-blinded randomized trial began in April 2019 in the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Lethbridge. Adults who consumed tobacco, alcohol, or sugar-sweetened beverages in the past month and live in Lethbridge, Alberta are being recruited using ads placed in public spaces. Participants are randomly allocated to a 12-session group yoga class, 12-session group drumming class, a 12-session psychoeducation class, or control. Participants attend an appointment in-person to fill out an online questionnaire package, provide a saliva sample, and complete physical measures pre-intervention, and 1-month and 6-months post-intervention. DISCUSSION: This study provides a unique opportunity to compare the impacts of two trauma-informed body-based interventions to psychoeducation and control for cancer-risk behaviour among community-based adults. The findings can be used to develop trauma-informed group interventions to reduce cancer-risk behaviour in general populations. Results are expected in 2022. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN15583681 on 22 August 2019 (retrospectively registered).

Changes in physical activity, sedentary behavior, and self-reported cognitive function in cancer survivors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) and reductions in sedentary behavior (SED) may mitigate cancer-related cognitive impairment. The purpose of this study was to examine (a) the associations between changes in PA, SED, and cognitive function in cancer survivors before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; and (b) clinical subgroups that moderate this association. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered online to adult cancer survivors globally between July and November of 2020. This was a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey examining changes in self-reported PA and quality of life in cancer survivors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-reported Questionnaires assessed moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) using the modified Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire, cognitive function using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function (FACT-Cog) scale, and SED using the Domain-specific Sitting Time questionnaire. Cancer survivors were classified into no change in behavior, desirable change (i.e., increase MVPA to meet PA guidelines or decrease SED by ≥60 min/day), and undesirable change (i.e., decrease MVPA to <150 min/week or increase SED by ≥60 min/day). Analysis of covariance examined differences in FACT-Cog scores across the activity change categories. Planned contrasts compared differences in FACT-Cog scores between cancer survivors with (a) no meaningful change vs. any change, and (b) a desirable change vs. an undesirable change. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in FACT-Cog scores across activity-change categories in the full sample of cancer survivors (n = 371; age = 48.6 ± 15.3 years (mean ± SD)). However, cancer survivors who were diagnosed ≥5 years ago (t(160) = -2.15, p = 0.03) or who received treatment ≥5 years ago (t(102) = -2.23, p = 0.03) and who had a desirable change in activity reported better perceived cognitive abilities than those who had an undesirable change. CONCLUSION: PA promotion efforts should consider reducing SED in addition to maintaining MVPA in long-term cancer survivors to mitigate cancer-related cognitive impairment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The importance of collaboration between medical and exercise professionals in addressing patient physical inactivity.

Physical activity has declined further during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Physicians are at the front lines of proactively educating and promoting physical activity to patients; however, physicians do not feel confident and face numerous barriers in prescribing exercise to patients. Exercise referral schemes, comprising collaborations with qualified exercise professionals, represent a fruitful option for supporting physicians hoping to promote physical activity to more patients. Herein, we provide practical suggestions for establishing and creating a successful referral scheme. Ultimately, exercise referral schemes offer an alternative to help physician burnout and mitigate patient physical inactivity during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Reducing Sedentary Time among Older Adults in Assisted Living: Perceptions, Barriers, and Motivators.

Older adults accumulate more sedentary time (ST) than any other age group, especially those in assisted living residences (ALRs). Reducing prolonged ST could help maintain function among older adults. However, to develop effective intervention strategies, it is important to understand the factors that influence sedentary behavior. The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions of ST as well as barriers and motivators to reducing ST among older adults in assisted living, in the context of the Social Ecological Model (SEM). Using a qualitative description approach, we sought to learn about participants' perceptions of sedentary time in their daily lives. Semi-structured focus groups were held at six ALRs with 31 participants (84% women, 83.5 ± 6.5 years). Data were transcribed and coded using an inductive thematic approach. Themes were categorized based on four levels of the SEM: individual, social, physical environment, and organization. Many reported barriers were at the individual level (e.g., lack of motivation, pain, fatigue) while others were associated with the organization or social environment (e.g., safety concerns, lack of activities outside of business hours, and social norms). These findings suggest that there are unique challenges and opportunities to consider when designing ST interventions for assisted living.

The impact of eHealth group interventions on the mental, behavioral, and physical health of adults: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has resulted in an increased demand for eHealth services globally. There is emerging evidence for the efficacy for group eHealth interventions that support population-based mental health and wellbeing, but a systematic review is lacking. The primary objective of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence for eHealth group counseling and coaching programs for adults. A second objective is to assess, within studies selected for our primary objective, the impact of programs that encourage PA on outcomes compared to those that do not. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials that assess the impact of eHealth group counseling or coaching programs on mental health, health behavior, or physical health activity among community-dwelling adults will be included. We will search the following electronic databases (from January 2005 onwards): MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, and the Central Register of Controlled Trials. The primary outcomes will be changes in mental health conditions (e.g., depression, anxiety, stress, quality of life), behavioral health conditions (e.g., substance use, smoking, sexual behavior, eating behavior, medication adherence), and physical health conditions (e.g., coping with cancer, menopausal symptoms, arthritis pain). Secondary outcomes will be changes in physical activity. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. A narrative synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted. The strength of the body of evidence will be assessed using GRADE. The risk of bias in individual studies will be appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Potential sources of gender bias in included studies will be considered at all stages of the planned review. DISCUSSION: This review will contribute to the literature by providing evidence on the effectiveness of eHealth counseling and coaching programs delivered to adults in a group format. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42020187551 ).