Changes in socioeconomic resources and mental health after the second COVID-19 wave (2020-2021): a longitudinal study in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: During the 2020/2021 winter, the labour market was under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in socioeconomic resources during this period could have influenced individual mental health. This association may have been mitigated or exacerbated by subjective risk perceptions, such as perceived risk of getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 or perception of the national economic situation. Therefore, we aimed to determine if changes in financial resources and employment situation during and after the second COVID-19 wave were prospectively associated with depression, anxiety and stress, and whether perceptions of the national economic situation and of the risk of getting infected modified this association. METHODS: One thousand seven hundred fifty nine participants from a nation-wide population-based eCohort in Switzerland were followed between November 2020 and September 2021. Financial resources and employment status were assessed twice (Nov2020-Mar2021, May-Jul 2021). Mental health was assessed after the second measurement of financial resources and employment status, using the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). We modelled DASS-21 scores with linear regression, adjusting for demographics, health status, social relationships and changes in workload, and tested interactions with subjective risk perceptions. RESULTS: We observed scores above thresholds for normal levels for 16% (95%CI = 15-18) of participants for depression, 8% (95%CI = 7-10) for anxiety, and 10% (95%CI = 9-12) for stress. Compared to continuously comfortable or sufficient financial resources, continuously precarious or insufficient resources were associated with worse scores for all outcomes. Increased financial resources were associated with higher anxiety. In the working-age group, shifting from full to part-time employment was associated with higher stress and anxiety. Perceiving the Swiss economic situation as worrisome was associated with higher anxiety in participants who lost financial resources or had continuously precarious or insufficient resources. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the association of economic stressors and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and highlights the exacerbating role of subjective risk perception on this association.

Home Treatment for Acute Mental Health Care: Protocol for the Financial Outputs, Risks, Efficacy, Satisfaction Index and Gatekeeping of Home Treatment (FORESIGHT) Study.

BACKGROUND: Crisis Resolution and Home Treatment (CRHT) teams represent a community-based mental health service offering a valid alternative to hospitalization. CRHT teams have been widely implemented in various mental health systems worldwide, and their goal is to provide care for people with severe acute mental disorders who would be considered for admission to acute psychiatric wards. The evaluation of several home-treatment experiences shows promising results; however, it remains unclear which specific elements and characteristics of CRHT are more effective and acceptable. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the acceptability, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of a new CRHT intervention in Ticino, Southern Switzerland. METHODS: This study includes an interventional, nonrandomized, quasi-experimental study combined with a qualitative study and an economic evaluation to be conducted over a 48-month period. The quasi-experimental evaluation involves two groups: patients in the northern area of the region who were offered the CRHT service (ie, intervention group) and patients in the southern area of the region who received care as usual (ie, control group). Individual interviews will be conducted with patients receiving the home treatment intervention and their family members. CRHT members will also be asked to participate in a focus group. The economic evaluation will include a cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: The project is funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation as part of the National Research Program NRP74 for a period of 48 months starting from January 2017. As of October 2021, data for the nonrandomized, quasi-experimental study and the qualitative study have been collected, and the results are expected to be published by the end of the year. Data are currently being collected for the economic evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to other Swiss CRHT experiences, the CRHT intervention in Ticino represents a unique case, as the introduction of the service is backed by the closing of one of its acute wards. The proposed study will address several areas where there are evidence gaps or contradictory findings relating to the home treatment of acute mental crisis. Findings from this study will allow local services to improve their effectiveness in a challenging domain of public health and contribute to improving access to more effective care for people with severe mental disorders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN38472626; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN38472626. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/28191.

What Adherence Measures Should Be Used in Trials of Home-Based Rehabilitation Interventions? A Systematic Review of the Validity, Reliability, and Acceptability of Measures.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review methods for measuring adherence used in home-based rehabilitation trials and to evaluate their validity, reliability, and acceptability. DATA SOURCES: In phase 1 we searched the CENTRAL database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and Health Technology Assessment Database (January 2000 to April 2013) to identify adherence measures used in randomized controlled trials of allied health professional home-based rehabilitation interventions. In phase 2 we searched the databases of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, and Web of Science (inception to April 2015) for measurement property assessments for each measure. STUDY SELECTION: Studies assessing the validity, reliability, or acceptability of adherence measures. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on participant and measure characteristics, measurement properties evaluated, evaluation methods, and outcome statistics and assessed study quality using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. DATA SYNTHESIS: In phase 1 we included 8 adherence measures (56 trials). In phase 2, from the 222 measurement property assessments identified in 109 studies, 22 high-quality measurement property assessments were narratively synthesized. Low-quality studies were used as supporting data. StepWatch Activity Monitor validly and acceptably measured short-term step count adherence. The Problematic Experiences of Therapy Scale validly and reliably assessed adherence to vestibular rehabilitation exercises. Adherence diaries had moderately high validity and acceptability across limited populations. The Borg 6 to 20 scale, Bassett and Prapavessis scale, and Yamax CW series had insufficient validity. Low-quality evidence supported use of the Joint Protection Behaviour Assessment. Polar A1 series heart monitors were considered acceptable by 1 study. CONCLUSIONS: Current rehabilitation adherence measures are limited. Some possess promising validity and acceptability for certain parameters of adherence, situations, and populations and should be used in these situations. Rigorous evaluation of adherence measures in a broader range of populations is needed.

Optimisation of complex health interventions prior to a randomised controlled trial: a scoping review of strategies used.

BACKGROUND: Many complex intervention trials fail to show an intervention effect. Although this may be due to genuine ineffectiveness, it may also be the result of sub-optimal intervention design, implementation failure or a combination of these. Given current financial constraints and the pressure to reduce waste and increase value in health services research, pre-trial strategies are needed to reduce the likelihood of design or implementation failure and to maximise the intervention's potential for effectiveness. In this scoping review, we aimed to identify and synthesise the available evidence relating to the strategies and methods used to 'optimise' complex interventions at the pre-trial stage. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO and ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source for papers published between January 2000 and March 2015. We included intervention development and optimisation studies that explored potential intervention weaknesses and limitations before moving to a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT). Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria and systematically extracted information relating to the following: study characteristics; intervention under development; framework used to guide the development process; areas of focus of the optimisation process, methods used and outcomes of the optimisation process. Data were tabulated and summarised in a narrative format. RESULTS: We screened 3968 titles and 231 abstracts for eligibility. Eighty-nine full-text papers were retrieved; 27 studies met our selection criteria. Optimisation strategies were used for a range of reasons: to explore the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention to patients and healthcare professionals; to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different combinations of intervention components; and to identify potential barriers to implementation. Methods varied widely across studies, from interviews and focus groups to economic modelling and probability analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The review identifies a range of optimisation strategies currently used. Although a preliminary classification of these strategies can be proposed, a series of questions remain as to which methods to use for different interventions and how to determine when the intervention is ready or 'optimised enough' to be tested in a RCT. Future research should explore potential answers to the questions raised, to guide researchers in the development and evaluation of more effective interventions.