Exploring the over-time, multifaceted impacts of three COVID-19 lockdowns on aspects of capability, wellbeing and mental health across vulnerabilities in Austria.

The Austrian government imposed multiple major lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the relevant measures and their perceptions varied over time. The aim of this study was to compare the over-time impacts of the three COVID-19 lockdowns between March 2020 and December 2021 for (capability) wellbeing and mental health in Austria. Adult Austrian residents (n = 87) completed an online survey about their experiences during three COVID-19 lockdowns, including capabilities (OxCAP-MH), depression and anxiety (HADS), and general wellbeing (WHO-5). Differences across the baseline and follow-up scores of these instruments were summarised by demographic/socioeconomic characteristics. Longitudinal comparisons of the impacts of the lockdowns were conducted using random effect models on panel data for overall instrument scores and individual capability items. The levels of (capability) wellbeing and mental health decreased for most respondents across the three lockdowns: average 2.4% reduction in OxCAP-MH scores, 18.8% and 9% increases in HADS depression and anxiety subscale scores respectively, and 19.7% reduction in WHO-5 score between the first and third lockdowns. Mental health treatment prior to the pandemic, social support and satisfaction with government measures were the most influential characteristics that determine the association with impacts of the chain of lockdowns. Our study is the first to assess the differential capability limiting aspects of lockdowns over time alongside their impacts on mental health and general wellbeing and calls for special attention for mental health patients, isolation and satisfaction with government measures.

Comparison of capability and health-related quality of life instruments in capturing aspects of mental well-being in people with schizophrenia and depression.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that assessing outcomes in terms of capability provides information beyond that of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for outcome evaluation in mental health research and clinical practice. AIMS: To assess similarities and differences in the measurement properties of the ICECAP-A capability measure and Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire for Mental Health (OxCAP-MH) in people with schizophrenia experiencing depression, and compare these measurement properties with those of (a) the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L and EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) and (b) mental health-specific (disease-specific) measures. METHOD: Using data for 100 patients from the UK, measurement properties were compared using correlation analyses, Bland-Altman plots and exploratory factor analysis. Responsiveness was assessed by defining groups who worsened, improved or remained unchanged, based on whether there was a clinically meaningful change in the instrument scores between baseline and 9-month follow-up assessments. RESULTS: The two capability instruments had stronger convergent validity with each other (Spearman's rho = 0.677) than with the HRQoL (rho = 0.354-0.431) or the mental health-specific (rho = 0.481-0.718) instruments. The OxCAP-MH tended to have stronger correlations with mental health-specific instruments than the ICECAP-A, whereas the ICECAP-A had slightly stronger correlation with the EQ-VAS. Change scores on the capability instruments correlated weakly with change scores on the HRQoL scales (rho = 0.131-0.269), but moderately with those on mental health-specific instruments for the ICECAP-A (rho = 0.355-0.451) and moderately/strongly on the OxCAP-MH (rho = 0.437-0.557). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing outcomes in terms of capabilities for people with schizophrenia and depression provided more relevant, mental health-specific information than the EQ-5D-5L or the EQ-VAS. The ICECAP-A and the OxCAP-MH demonstrated similar psychometric properties, but the OxCAP-MH was more correlated with disease-specific instruments.

Does the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH's capability items differ according to mental ill-health experience?

BACKGROUND: Some capability dimensions may be more important than others in determining someone's well-being, and these preferences might be dependent on ill-health experience. This study aimed to explore the relative preference weights of the 16 items of the German language version of the OxCAP-MH (Oxford Capability questionnaire-Mental Health) capability instrument and their differences across cohorts with alternative levels of mental ill-health experience. METHODS: A Best-Worst-Scaling (BWS) survey was conducted in Austria among 1) psychiatric patients (direct mental ill-health experience), 2) (mental) healthcare experts (indirect mental ill-health experience), and 3) primary care patients with no mental ill-health experience. Relative importance scores for each item of the German OxCAP-MH instrument were calculated using Hierarchical Bayes estimation. Rank analysis and multivariable linear regression analysis with robust standard errors were used to explore the relative importance of the OxCAP-MH items across the three cohorts. RESULTS: The study included 158 participants with complete cases and acceptable fit statistic. The relative importance scores for the full cohort ranged from 0.76 to 15.72. Findings of the BWS experiment indicated that the items Self-determination and Limitation in daily activities were regarded as the most important for all three cohorts. Freedom of expression was rated significantly less important by psychiatric patients than by the other two cohorts, while Having suitable accommodation appeared significantly less important by the expert cohort. There were no further significant differences in the relative preference weights of OxCAP-MH items between the cohorts or according to gender. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates significant between-item but limited mental ill-health related heterogeneity in the relative preference weights of the different capability items within the OxCAP-MH. The findings support the future development of preference-based value sets elicited from the general population for comparative economic evaluation purposes.

Patient-reported outcome measures suitable for quality of life/well-being assessment in multisectoral, multinational and multiperson mental health economic evaluations.

QUESTION: The aim was to systematically collate and synthesise existing, publicly available patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) information suitable for quality of life (QOL)/well-being measurement in mental health economic evaluations, with specific focus on their applicability in multisectoral, multinational, multiperson economic evaluations and to develop an electronic PROM compendium with meta-data. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: A systematic literature search for non-disease-pecific PROMs and their versions suitable for the measurement of QOL/well-being or recovery was conducted from 2008 to February 2020. Six criteria were applied to judge their suitability in multisectoral, multinational, multiperson economic evaluations: (i) availability of separate adult and child/adolescent versions, (ii) availability of a proxy-completion option, (iii) assessing outcomes beyond health, (iv) availability of translations (≥2 language versions), (v) availability of a preference-based valuation, (vi) availability of value sets in more than one country. FINDINGS: The final ProgrammE in Costing, resource use measurement and outcome valuation for Use in multisectoral National and International health economic evaluAtions (PECUNIA) PROM-MH Compendium includes 204 unique scales, out of which 88 are individual instruments, while the remaining 116 scales belong to 46 PROM families with more than one distinctive version. Out of the total 134 individual PROMs/PROM families, 72% have at least two language versions, 8% measure broader well-being beyond health-related QOL, 11% have preference-based valuation, with multiple country sets available for 60% of these. None of the identified PROMs met all six proposed criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The PECUNIA PROM-MH Compendium provides a unique overview of the relevant PROMs and their linked meta-data, and should be a helpful tool when choosing a suitable instrument for future mental health economic evaluations.

Internal and external aspects of freedom of choice in mental health: cultural and linguistic adaptation of the Hungarian version of the Oxford CAPabilities questionnaire-Mental Health (OxCAP-MH).

BACKGROUND: A link between mental health and freedom of choice has long been established, in fact, the loss of freedom of choice is one of the possible defining features of mental disorders. Freedom of choice has internal and external aspects explicitly identified within the capability approach, but received little explicit attention in capability instruments. This study aimed to develop a feasible and linguistically and culturally appropriate Hungarian version of the Oxford CAPabilities questionnaire-Mental Health (OxCAP-MH) for mental health outcome measurement. METHODS: Following forward and back translations, a reconciled Hungarian version of the OxCAP-MH was developed following professional consensus guidelines of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and the WHO. The wording of the questionnaire underwent cultural and linguistic validation through content analysis of cognitive debriefing interviews with 11 Hungarian speaking mental health patients in 2019. Results were compared with those from the development of the German version and the original English version with special focus on linguistic aspects. RESULTS: Twenty-nine phrases were translated. There were linguistic differences in each question and answer options due to the high number of inflected, affixed words and word fragments that characterize the Hungarian language in general. Major linguistic differences were also revealed between the internal and external aspects of capability freedom of choices which appear much more explicit in the Hungarian than in the English or German languages. A re-analysis of the capability freedom of choice concepts in the existing language versions exposed the need for minor amendments also in the English version in order to allow the development of future culturally, linguistically and conceptually valid translations. CONCLUSION: The internal and external freedom of choice impacts of mental health conditions require different care/policy measures. Their explicit consideration is necessary for the conceptually harmonised operationalisation of the capability approach for (mental) health outcome measurement in diverse cultural and linguistic contexts.

Perceptions of Covid-19 lockdowns and related public health measures in Austria: a longitudinal online survey.

BACKGROUND: Introducing national lockdown has been effective in containing Covid-19. However, several studies indicated negative impacts of lockdowns on the well-being and mental health of many people. In Austria, the first Covid-19-related lockdown was introduced on 16 March 2020 with most restrictions being lifted 1 month later. Seven months after that, in November 2020, the second full lockdown was implemented. The aim of this study was to compare the perceptions and experiences of the general population related to the first and second Covid-19 lockdowns in Austria. METHODS: Two waves of an online survey were conducted in May and December 2020 asking respondents about their concerns related to the Covid-19 illness, personal experiences of the lockdowns, perceptions of and compliance with imposed public health measures, and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on different aspects of life during the two lockdowns. Descriptive statistics including frequency analysis were used to compare respondents' answers collected in the two waves of the survey. T-test and chi-square tests were used to test differences between the two lockdowns. RESULTS: Five hundred sixty participants were included in the first wave and a sub-sample of 134 participants in the second wave of data collection. During the second lockdown, study respondents were more concerned about their family members contracting Covid-19 when compared with the first lockdown. Compliance with public health measures was overall lower during the second lockdown, although it varied according to the type of the measure. Closure of schools was seen as the least essential restriction during the second lockdown, while wearing masks gained additional approval between the first and the second lockdown. Larger negative impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic on friendships, leisure activities, education and community were reported during the second lockdown. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that the extended duration of the pandemic and recurring lockdowns restricting freedom of movement and social contacts appear to have caused significant disruptions to many areas of life. Furthermore, declining adherence to most public health measures over time raises a question about the effectiveness of future lockdown measures.

Study protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled trial of pramipexole in addition to mood stabilisers for patients with treatment resistant bipolar depression (the PAX-BD study).

BACKGROUND: Treatment Resistant Bipolar Depression (TRBD) is a major contributor to the burden of disease associated with Bipolar Disorder (BD). Treatment options for people experiencing bipolar depression are limited to three interventions listed by National Institute for Health and Care: lamotrigine, quetiapine and olanzapine, of which the latter two are often not well tolerated. The majority of depressed people with BD are therefore prescribed antidepressants despite limited efficacy. This demonstrates an unmet need for additional interventions. Pramipexole has been shown to improve mood symptoms in animal models of depression, in people with Parkinson's Disease and two proof of principle trials of pramipexole for people with BD who are currently depressed. METHODS: The PAX-BD study, funded by the United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health Research, aims to extend previous findings by assessing the efficacy, safety and health economic impact of pramipexole in addition to mood stabilisers for patients with TRBD. A randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled design is conducted in a naturalistic UK National Health Service setting. An internal pilot study to examine feasibility and acceptability of the study design is included. Participants with TRBD are screened from National Health Service secondary care services in up to 40 mental health trusts in the UK, with the aim of recruiting approximately 414 participants into a pre-randomisation phase to achieve a target of 290 randomised participants. Primary safety and efficacy measures are at 12 weeks following randomisation, with follow up of participants to 52 weeks. The primary outcome is depressive symptoms as measured by Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report. Secondary outcomes include changes in anxiety, manic symptoms, tolerability, acceptability, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Outcome measures are collected remotely using self-report tools implemented online, and observer-rated assessments conducted via telephone. ANCOVA will be used to examine the difference in rating scale scores between treatment arms, and dependent on compliance in completion of weekly self-report measures. A mixed effects linear regression model may also be used to account for repeated measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN72151939. Registered on 28 August 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN72151939 Protocol Version: 04-FEB-2021, Version 9.0.

Impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown and relevant vulnerabilities on capability well-being, mental health and social support: an Austrian survey study.

BACKGROUND: Impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic and its public health measures go beyond physical and mental health and incorporate wider well-being impacts in terms of what people are free to do or be. We explored the impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown and relevant vulnerabilities on capability well-being, mental health and social support in Austria. METHODS: Adult Austrian residents (n = 560) provided responses to a cross-sectional online survey about their experiences during Covid-19 lockdown (15 March-15 April 2020). Instruments measuring capabilities (OxCAP-MH), depression and anxiety (HADS), social support (MSPSS) and mental well-being (WHO-5) were used in association with six pre-defined vulnerabilities using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: 31% of the participants reported low mental well-being and only 30% of those with a history of mental health treatment received treatment during lockdown. Past mental health treatment had a significant negative effect across all outcome measures with an associated capability well-being score reduction of - 6.54 (95%CI, - 9.26, - 3.82). Direct Covid-19 experience and being 'at risk' due to age and/or physical health conditions were also associated with significant capability deprivations. When adjusted for vulnerabilities, significant capability reductions were observed in association with increased levels of depression (- 1.77) and anxiety (- 1.50), and significantly higher capability levels (+ 3.75) were associated with higher levels of social support. Compared to the cohort average, individual capability impacts varied between - 9% for those reporting past mental health treatment and + 5% for those reporting one score higher on the social support scale. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to assess the capability limiting aspects of lockdown and relevant vulnerabilities alongside their impacts on mental health and social support. The negative capability well-being, mental health and social support impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown were strongest for people with a history of mental health treatment. Future public health policies concerning lockdowns should pay special attention to improve social support levels in order to increase public resilience.

Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature.

PURPOSE: Given increasing interest in using the capability approach for health economic evaluations and a growing literature, this paper aims to synthesise current information about the characteristics of capability instruments and their application in health economic evaluations. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to assess studies that contained information on the development, psychometric properties and valuation of capability instruments, or their application in economic evaluations. RESULTS: The review identified 98 studies and 14 instruments for inclusion. There is some evidence on the psychometric properties of most instruments. Most papers found moderate-to-high correlation between health and capability measures, ranging between 0.41 and 0.64. ASCOT, ICECAP-A, -O and -SCM instruments have published valuation sets, most frequently developed using best-worst scaling. Thirteen instruments were originally developed in English and one in Portuguese; however, some translations to other languages are available. Ten economic evaluations using capability instruments were identified. The presentation of results show a lack of consensus regarding the most appropriate way to use capability instruments in economic evaluations with discussion about capability-adjusted life years (CALYs), years of capability equivalence and the trade-off between maximisation of capability versus sufficient capability. CONCLUSION: There has been increasing interest in applying the capability-based approach in health economic evaluations, but methodological and conceptual issues remain. There is still a need for direct comparison of the different capability instruments and for clear guidance on when and how they should be used in economic evaluations.

Structural Changes in the Hungarian Healthcare System Between 2000 and 2017.

BACKGROUND: The rigid and old-fashioned structure of the Hungarian healthcare system has been discussed since the mid-1990s and is at the center of professional and policy debates. It is characterized by the too high number of acute care hospital beds in international comparison; access is regionally unequal; levels of progressive care are mixed; and there is a nonuniform emergency service system with unequal access to the emergency room, heterogeneous quality of care, and unexploited opportunities of modern health technology (eg, 1-day surgery, minimally invasive procedures, telemedicine). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to analyze the indicators of ongoing structural changes of the Hungarian healthcare system between 2000 and 2017. METHODS: Data are derived from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Heath Statistics, Hungarian National Statistical Office, National Health Insurance Fund Administration and the database of the European Structural Funds. The methods used for the analysis are descriptive statistics, trend analysis, and longitudinal data. RESULTS: The total number of hospitals beds showed a 32% reduction between 2005 and 2017. Parallel with this subsequent reduction of hospital bed capacities, we can see a moderate reduction (22.3%) in the number of discharged patients from hospitals: from 2005 to 2017, 2.55 million to 1.95 million. The average length of stay in acute hospital care has decreased from 6.3 to 5.1 days. About 25 to 27 small local hospitals lost their acute or short-term care profile (mainly intensive care units, internal medicine, surgery, and pediatric care wards) and became long-term care, chronic care, or rehabilitation profile hospitals. CONCLUSION: Structural change is in progress in the Hungarian healthcare system, and some efficiency gains have been reached. Nevertheless, still there are significant potential efficiency gains in the better organization and management of health services in addition to the dissemination and better incorporation of modern healthcare technologies.

Developing attributes for discrete choice experiments in health: a systematic literature review and case study of alcohol misuse interventions.

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) become increasingly popular to value outcomes for health economic studies and gradually gain acceptance as an input into policy decisions. Developing attributes is a key aspect for the design of DCEs, as their results may misguide decision-makers if they are based on an inappropriate set of attributes. However, the area lacks guidance, and current health-related DCE studies vary considerably in their methods of attribute development, with the consequent danger of providing an unreliable input for policy decisions. The aim of this article is to inform the progress toward a more systematic approach to attribute development for DCE studies in health. A systematic review of the published health-related DCE literature was conducted to lay the foundations for a generic framework which was tested in a case study of alcohol misuse interventions. Four stages of a general attribute development process emerged: (i) raw data collection; (ii) data reduction; (iii) removing inappropriate attributes; and (iv) wording. The case study compared and contrasted a qualitative and mixed-methods approach for the development of attributes for DCEs in the area of alcohol misuse interventions. This article provides a reference point for the design of future DCE experiments in health.