Cost-utility analysis of the UPRIGHT intervention promoting resilience in adolescents.

BACKGROUND: As mental health in adulthood is related to mental status during adolescence, school-based interventions have been proposed to improve resilience. The objective of this study was to build a simulation model representing the natural history of mental disorders in childhood, adolescence and youth to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the UPRIGHT school-based intervention in promoting resilience and mental health in adolescence. METHODS: We built a discrete event simulation model fed with real-world data (cumulative incidence disaggregated into eight clusters) from the Basque Health Service database (609,381 individuals) to calculate utilities (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) and costs for the general population in two scenarios (base case and intervention). The model translated changes in the wellbeing of adolescents into different risks of mental illnesses for a time horizon of 30 years. RESULTS: The number of cases of anxiety was estimated to fall by 5,125 or 9,592 and those of depression by 1,269 and 2,165 if the effect of the intervention lasted 2 or 5 years respectively. From a healthcare system perspective, the intervention was cost-effective for all cases considered with incremental cost-utility ratios always lower than €10,000/QALY and dominant for some subgroups. The intervention was always dominant when including indirect and non-medical costs (societal perspective). CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary analysis of the trial did not did not detect significant differences, the UPRIGHT intervention promoting positive mental health was dominant in the economic evaluation from the societal perspective. Promoting resilience was more cost-effective in the most deprived group. Despite a lack of information about the spillover effect in some sectors, the economic evaluation framework developed principally for pharmacoeconomics can be applied to interventions to promote resilience in adolescents. As prevention of mental health disorders is even more necessary in the post-coronavirus disease-19 era, such evaluation is essential to assess whether investment in mental health promotion would be good value for money by avoiding costs for healthcare providers and other stakeholders.

Risk of Suicidal Behavior in Children and Adolescents Exposed to Maltreatment: The Mediating Role of Borderline Personality Traits and Recent Stressful Life Events.

Childhood maltreatment (CM) is associated with increased non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidal behavior (SB), independently of demographic and mental health conditions. Self-Trauma Theory and Linehan's Biopsychosocial Model might explain the emergence of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) symptoms as mediators of the association between CM and the risk of SB. However, little is known regarding such relationships when the exposure is recent for young persons. Here, we study 187 youths aged 7-17, with or without mental disorders. We explore CM experiences (considering the severity and frequency of different forms of neglect and abuse), recent stressful life events (SLEs), some BPD traits (emotion dysregulation, intense anger and impulsivity), and the risk of SB (including NSSI, suicide threat, suicide ideation, suicide plan and suicide attempt). We study the direct and mediating relationships between these variables via a structural equation analysis using the statistical software package EQS. Our findings suggest that youths exposed to more severe/frequent CM have more prominent BPD traits, and are more likely to have experienced recent SLEs. In turn, BPD traits increase the risk of SLEs. However, only emotion dysregulation and recent SLEs were found to be correlated with SB. Therefore, targeted interventions on emotion dysregulation are necessary to prevent NSSI or SB in children and adolescents exposed to CM, as is the minimization of further SLEs.

Lifestyle changes and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A repeated, cross-sectional web survey.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare self-reported changes on lifestyle behaviors during two phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain, and to evaluate clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with lifestyles. METHODS: Two cross-sectional web surveys were conducted during lockdown (April 15-May 15, 2020) and seven months later (November 16-December 16, 2020). Lifestyle behaviors were self-reported by a multidimensional scale (SMILE-C). Two separate samples of respondents were analyzed. A multivariate regression model was performed to evaluate the association of SMILE-C scores with demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: The sample comprised, 3412 participants from the first survey (S1) and in the S1 and 3635 from the second (S2). SMILE-C score decreased across surveys (p < 0.001). The rates of positive screenings for depression and anxiety were similar between the surveys, whereas those for alcohol abuse decreased (p < 0.001). Most participants in S2 reported that their lifestyle had not changed compared to those before the pandemic. Variables independently associated with an unhealthier lifestyle were working as an essential worker, lower educational level, previous mental disease, worse self-rated health, totally/moderate changes on diet, sleep or social support, as well as positive screenings for alcohol abuse, anxiety and depression. LIMITATIONS: The cross-sectional design and recruitment by non-probabilistic methods limit inferring causality and the external validity of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Overall lifestyle worsened seven months after the lockdown in Spain. Several demographic and clinical factors were associated with lifestyle scores. The contribution of common mental disorders to unhealthier lifestyles should be considered in order to prevent the negative impact of the pandemic.

Lifestyle in Undergraduate Students and Demographically Matched Controls during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Spain.

Few studies have used a multidimensional approach to describe lifestyle changes among undergraduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic or have included controls. This study aimed to evaluate lifestyle behaviors and mental health of undergraduate students and compare them with an age and sex-matched control group. A cross-sectional web survey using snowball sampling was conducted several months after the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic in Spain. A sample of 221 students was recruited. The main outcome was the total SMILE-C score. Students showed a better SMILE-C score than controls (79.8 + 8.1 vs. 77.2 + 8.3; p < 0.001), although these differences disappeared after controlling for covariates. While groups did not differ in the screenings of depression and alcohol abuse, students reported lower rates of anxiety (28.5% vs. 37.1%; p = 0.042). A lower number of cohabitants, poorer self-perceived health and positive screening for depression and anxiety, or for depression only were independently associated (p < 0.05) with unhealthier lifestyles in both groups. History of mental illness and financial difficulties were predictors of unhealthier lifestyles for students, whereas totally/moderate changes in substance abuse and stress management (p < 0.05) were predictors for the members of the control group. Several months after the pandemic, undergraduate students and other young adults had similar lifestyles.