'Lifts your spirits, lifts your mind': A co-produced mixed-methods exploration of the benefits of green and blue spaces for mental wellbeing.

INTRODUCTION: Mental health problems are a considerable public health issue and spending time in nature has been promoted as a way to access a range of psychological benefits leading to the development of nature-based interventions for people with severe and enduring mental health problems. Less, however, is understood about the potential benefits and efficacy of day-to-day routine access to outdoor green and blue spaces for mental health service users. METHODS: Using a mixed-methods design between April and October 2021, we explored the benefits and barriers to spending time outdoors with a purposive sample of mental health service users (N = 11) using qualitative interviews and an online general population survey (N = 1791). Qualitative evidence highlighted the restorative benefits of nature and identified a number of barriers associated with fears around personal safety, social anxiety, fatigue and lack of motivation. COVID-19 had also restricted access to green and blue spaces. Having social contact and support encouraged people to spend time outdoors. In the quantitative survey, self-report and standardised measures (the Patient Health Questionnaire and the Warwick-Edinburgh Wellbeing Scale) were used to assess past and current mental wellbeing. FINDINGS: Statistically significant differences were found between wellbeing and the use of green and blue spaces. Those with mental health problems spent time outdoors because they: felt guilty; wanted to reduce their anxiety; or rely on someone for encouragement. Those without mental health problems endorsed more positively framed reasons including relaxation, improving physical health or getting exercise. Barriers for people with mental health problems involved safety concerns, feeling anxious and having a poor self-image. These findings give insight into motivations for an outdoor activity to help inform the design of public mental health interventions. CONCLUSION: Further work is required to improve access and safety to promote the benefits of green and blue spaces for everyone. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The research team included expert experienced researchers with a mental health service provider (Praxis Care) and they were involved in the development of the research idea, funding application, design, data collection, analysis, writing up and dissemination activities.

Bereaved Parent Perspectives and Recommendations on Best Practices for Legacy Interventions.

CONTEXT: Many pediatric hospitals offer legacy interventions for families to promote coping and support grief prior to and following the death of a child. Despite this practice, parent perceptions of the value of legacy activities are not well described, and best practices for offering and creating legacy interventions remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To characterize bereaved parents' perspectives on the value of legacy activities; to describe parent recommendations for optimizing provision of legacy activities by child life specialists and music therapists. METHODS: In this qualitative study, a purposive sample of 19 bereaved parents of children who died from cancer participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed inductively using content analysis to identify key concepts and emerging themes. RESULTS: Analysis of transcripts revealed bereaved parent insights and recommendations across three core themes: 1) the value of legacy items and interventions; 2) the practical roles, uses, and functions of legacy items, and 3) best practices for offering legacy interventions. Bereaved parents sought meaning and purpose in abstract and concrete manifestations of legacy. Parents often used legacy items in specific ways to promote emotional expression and process their grief. Communication, timing, and creativity significantly influenced parent perceptions of legacy-building. Parents recommended individualized assessments to optimize provision of legacy interventions. CONCLUSION: Bereaved parents emphasized the meaningfulness of legacy-building activities and the need for an individualized approach when offering these interventions. Future research should explore the perspectives and recommendations of patients and siblings on legacy activities.