Physical and mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic at first year in a Spanish adult cohort.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the political and health measures have profoundly affected the health of our populations. However, very few studies have been published assessing its impact using a prospective cohort. The aim of this study is to describe the impact on physical and mental health due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the general population in Spain, and according to COVID-19 clinical status, during the first year of the pandemic. A longitudinal cohort study with two online surveys were performed on a representative sample of the adult Spanish population before (N = 2005, October/November 2019) and during the pandemic (N = 1357, November/December 2020). We assessed disability using the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS), major depressive episode (MDE) and suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STB), using an adapted version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0); generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) using the GAD-7 scale; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms using the PTSD checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). For physical health, there was a statistically significant loss of weight (mean/SD) (T0, 73.22/15.56 vs. T1, 71.21/11.94), less use of tobacco (T0, 11.4% vs. T1, 9.0%) and decreased disability (mean/SD) (T0, 21.52/9.22 vs. T1, 19.03/7.32). For mental health, there was a significant increase in MDE (T0, 6.5% vs. T1, 8.8%) and in the prevalence of GAD (T0, 13.7% vs. T1, 17.7%). The prevalence of STB (T0, 15.1% vs. T1, 7.1%) significantly decreased. Individuals who declared they had been diagnosed with COVID-19 (3.6%) showed a worsening in physical health and an increase in mental health problems and PTSD symptoms. Although suicide risk during the first year of the pandemic was significantly less, many suicide risk factors increased: such as the incidence and persistence of MDE and GAD, the presence of PTSD symptoms in those diagnosed with COVID-19, and a worsening in self-assessed health status. We expect an increase in STB in the population in the long-term. Future research should gather information about the long-term impact of the pandemic.

A multiple health behaviour change intervention to prevent depression: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of a 12-month MHBC intervention in the prevention of onset depression in primary health care (PHC). METHODS: Twenty-two PHC centres took part in the cluster-randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive either usual care or an MHBC intervention. The endpoints were onset of major depression and reduction of depressive symptoms in participants without baseline depression at a 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: 2531 patients agreed and were eligible to participate. At baseline, around 43% were smokers, 82% were non-adherent to the Mediterranean diet and 55% did not perform enough physical activity. The intervention group exhibited a greater positive change in two or more behaviours (OR 1.75 [95%CI: 1.17 to 2.62]; p = 0.006); any behaviour (OR 1.58 [95%CI: 1.13 to 2.20]; p = 0.007); and adherence to the Mediterranean diet (OR 1.94 [95%CI: 1.29 to 2.94]; p = 0.002), while this increase was not statistically significant for smoking and physical activity. The intervention was not effective in preventing major depression (OR 1.17; [95% CI 0.53 to 2.59)]; p = 0.690) or reducing depressive symptoms (Mean difference: 0.30; [95% CI -0.77 to 1.36]; p = 0.726) during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: As compared to usual care, the MHBC intervention provided a non-significant reduction in the incidence of major depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03136211.

Effectiveness of a multiple health-behaviour-change intervention in increasing adherence to the Mediterranean Diet in adults (EIRA study): a randomized controlled hybrid trial.

BACKGROUND: The present study describes the effectiveness of a complex intervention that addresses multiple lifestyles to promote healthy behaviours in increasing adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MD).  METHODS: Cluster-randomised, hybrid clinical trial controlled with two parallel groups. The study was carried out in 26 primary Spanish healthcare centres. People aged 45-75 years who presented at least two of the following criteria were included: smoker, low adherence to the MD or insufficient level of physical activity. The intervention group (IG) had three different levels of action: individual, group, and community, with the aim of acting on the behaviours related to smoking, diet and physical activity at the same time. The individual intervention included personalised recommendations and agreements on the objectives to attain. Group sessions were adapted to the context of each healthcare centre. The community intervention was focused on the social prescription of resources and activities performed in the environment of the community of each healthcare centre. Control group (CG) received brief advice given in the usual visits to the doctor's office. The primary outcome was the change, after 12 months, in the number of participants in each group with good adherence to the MD pattern. Secondary outcomes included the change in the total score of the MD adherence score (MEDAS) and the change in some cardiovascular risk factors. RESULTS: Three thousand sixty-two participants were included (IG = 1,481, CG = 1,581). Low adherence to the MD was present in 1,384 (93.5%) participants, of whom 1,233 initiated the intervention and conducted at least one individual visit with a healthcare professional. A greater increase (13.7%; 95% CI, 9.9-17.5; p < 0.001) was obtained by IG in the number of participants who reached 9 points or more (good adherence) in the MEDAS at the final visit. Moreover, the effect attributable to the intervention obtained a greater increase (0.50 points; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.66; p < 0.001) in IG. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention modelled and carried out by primary healthcare professionals, within a real clinical healthcare context, achieved a global increase in the adherence to the MD compared to the brief advice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03136211. Retrospectively registered on 02/05/2017 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03136211.

Multiple health behaviour change primary care intervention for smoking cessation, physical activity and healthy diet in adults 45 to 75 years old (EIRA study): a hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a) a Multiple Health Behaviour Change (MHBC) intervention on reducing smoking, increasing physical activity and adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern in people aged 45-75 years compared to usual care; and b) an implementation strategy. METHODS: A cluster randomised effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial-type 2 with two parallel groups was conducted in 25 Spanish Primary Health Care (PHC) centres (3062 participants): 12 centres (1481 participants) were randomised to the intervention and 13 (1581 participants) to the control group (usual care). The intervention was based on the Transtheoretical Model and focused on all target behaviours using individual, group and community approaches. PHC professionals made it during routine care. The implementation strategy was based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analysed using generalised linear mixed models, accounting for clustering. A mixed-methods data analysis was used to evaluate implementation outcomes (adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and fidelity) and determinants of implementation success. RESULTS: 14.5% of participants in the intervention group and 8.9% in the usual care group showed a positive change in two or all the target behaviours. Intervention was more effective in promoting dietary behaviour change (31.9% vs 21.4%). The overall adoption rate by professionals was 48.7%. Early and final appropriateness were perceived by professionals as moderate. Early acceptability was high, whereas final acceptability was only moderate. Initial and final acceptability as perceived by the participants was high, and appropriateness moderate. Consent and recruitment rates were 82.0% and 65.5%, respectively, intervention uptake was 89.5% and completion rate 74.7%. The global value of the percentage of approaches with fidelity ≥50% was 16.7%. Eight CFIR constructs distinguished between high and low implementation, five corresponding to the Inner Setting domain. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, the EIRA intervention was more effective in promoting MHBC and dietary behaviour change. Implementation outcomes were satisfactory except for the fidelity to the planned intervention, which was low. The organisational and structural contexts of the centres proved to be significant determinants of implementation effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03136211 . Registered 2 May 2017, "retrospectively registered".

Implementation of the EIRA 3 Intervention by Targeting Primary Health Care Practitioners: Effectiveness in Increasing Physical Activity.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that physical inactivity (PI) is responsible for 20 to 30% of all non-communicable diseases. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness of a multiple health behavior change (MHBC) intervention to increase physical activity (PA) in patients 45 to 75 years old who had at least 2 of 3 unhealthy behaviors (tobacco use, reduced fruit and vegetable consumption, and insufficient PA). The MHBC intervention is based on the Transtheoretical Model and the conceptual framework of the "5 A's" and includes an individually tailored intervention, group sessions, and the use of community resources. We included 3062 participants, 1481 in the intervention group and 1581 in the control group. After 12 months, there were no differences in PA intensity measured by metabolic_equivalent_of_task_minutes/week (adjusted mean difference: 284.093, 95% CI: -298.24, 866.42) nor in the proportion of participants who increased PA levels to moderate or high (OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.85, 1.23; p = 0.822), and no differences in blood pressure, weight loss, or waist circumference. We found an increased proportion of patients in the intervention group who followed the WHO recommendations for PA (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.60; p = 0.02). We concluded that the intervention did not lead to a significant increase in PA.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a multiple health behaviour change intervention in people aged between 45 and 75 years: a cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care (EIRA study).

BACKGROUND: Multiple health behaviour change (MHBC) interventions that promote healthy lifestyles may be an efficient approach in the prevention or treatment of chronic diseases in primary care. This study aims to evaluate the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of the health promotion EIRA intervention in terms of MHBC and cardiovascular reduction. METHODS: An economic evaluation alongside a 12-month cluster-randomised (1:1) controlled trial conducted between 2017 and 2018 in 25 primary healthcare centres from seven Spanish regions. The study took societal and healthcare provider perspectives. Patients included were between 45 and 75 years old and had any two of these three behaviours: smoking, insufficient physical activity or low adherence to Mediterranean dietary pattern. Intervention duration was 12 months and combined three action levels (individual, group and community). MHBC, defined as a change in at least two health risk behaviours, and cardiovascular risk (expressed in % points) were the outcomes used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated and used to calculate incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR). Missing data was imputed and bootstrapping with 1000 replications was used to handle uncertainty in the modelling results. RESULTS: The study included 3062 participants. Intervention costs were €295 higher than usual care costs. Five per-cent additional patients in the intervention group did a MHBC compared to usual care patients. Differences in QALYS or cardiovascular risk between-group were close to 0 (- 0.01 and 0.04 respectively). The ICER was €5598 per extra health behaviour change in one patient and €6926 per one-point reduction in cardiovascular risk from a societal perspective. The cost-utility analysis showed that the intervention increased costs and has no effect, in terms of QALYs, compared to usual care from a societal perspective. Cost-utility planes showed high uncertainty surrounding the ICUR. Sensitivity analysis showed results in line with the main analysis. CONCLUSION: The efficiency of EIRA intervention cannot be fully established and its recommendation should be conditioned by results on medium-long term effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03136211 . Registered 02 May 2017 - Retrospectively registered.

Health status, lifestyle habits, and perceived social support in long-term cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the presence of comorbidities and self-perceived health and social support between long-term cancer survivors and people without a history of cancer from a clinical trial examining the effects of a multiple risk behavior intervention. RESULTS: Of the 4259 people studied, 190 (4.46%) were cancer survivors. They had a mean ± SD age of 62.8 ± 7 years vs. 58.7 ± 8 years (P < 0.01) for non-cancer people and were more likely to be on long-term sick leave (11.9 vs. 3.5%, P < 0.001). No differences were observed for smoking, adherence to the Mediterranean diet, physical activity, obesity, or social support. Cancer survivors were more likely to have worse self-perceived health (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.02-2.75), more comorbidities (OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.18-2.39), COPD (OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.25-3.78), and depression (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.06-2.57). Older age and worse self-perceived health were independent predictors of survivorship in the adjusted analysis.

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review.

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100-1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Complex multiple risk intervention to promote healthy behaviours in people between 45 to 75 years attended in primary health care (EIRA study): study protocol for a hybrid trial.

BACKGROUND: Health promotion is a key process of current health systems. Primary Health Care (PHC) is the ideal setting for health promotion but multifaceted barriers make its integration difficult in the usual care. The majority of the adult population engages two or more risk behaviours, that is why a multiple intervention might be more effective and efficient. The primary objectives are to evaluate the effectiveness, the cost-effectiveness and an implementation strategy of a complex multiple risk intervention to promote healthy behaviours in people between 45 to 75 years attended in PHC. METHODS: This study is a cluster randomised controlled hybrid type 2 trial with two parallel groups comparing a complex multiple risk behaviour intervention with usual care. It will be carried out in 26 PHC centres in Spain. The study focuses on people between 45 and 75 years who carry out two or more of the following unhealthy behaviours: tobacco use, low adherence to the Mediterranean dietary pattern or insufficient physical activity level. The intervention is based on the Transtheoretical Model and it will be made by physicians and nurses in the routine care of PHC practices according to the conceptual framework of the "5A's". It will have a maximum duration of 12 months and it will be carried out to three different levels (individual, group and community). Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained measured by the tariffs of the EuroQol-5D questionnaire will be estimated. The implementation strategy is based on the "Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research", a set of discrete implementation strategies and an evaluation framework. DISCUSSION: EIRA study will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a complex multiple risk intervention and will provide a better understanding of implementation processes of health promotion interventions in PHC setting. It may contribute to increase knowledge about the individual and structural barriers that affect implementation of these interventions and to quantify the contextual factors that moderate the effectiveness of implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03136211 .Retrospectively registered on May 2, 2017.