Summary
Background
University students are at a heightened risk of developing mental health disorders. Online interventions are becoming increasingly popular in this target group, both to prevent the development of mental health disorders and to treat existing ones. The PLUS (Personality and Living of University Students) programme is a web-based targeted prevention intervention which has been tested across two European countries. Completion of this programme has been relatively poor. Understanding university students’ opinions, experiences and perceptions of the PLUS programme can lead to future improvements in intervention design, engagement and dissemination.
Methods
Semistructured interviews were conducted with university students from the UK (n = 10) and Austria (n = 14) who had previously had access to PLUS. Students were asked about their perception and experiences of the programme, and how it could be improved. Results were analysed using thematic analysis.
Results
Experience of online prevention programmes in general were limited and as a result of this, few had specific expectations of the PLUS programme before signing up. The lack of guidance and accountability due to the online nature of the programme made engagement challenging for many, however, frequent reminder emails helped mitigate this. In terms of positives of the programme, participants found the flexibility suitable for students and many noticed that the programme created change in how they thought or behaved.
Conclusion
Overall, the PLUS programme was well received by students, despite study retention being poor. Although PLUS was viewed as a useful tool to integrate into the university setting, several improvements were suggested to increase engagement. By considering this feedback, uptake and intervention completion can be improved for future preventative interventions.
Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Studierende haben ein erhöhtes Risiko für psychische Erkrankungen. Zunehmend werden in dieser Zielgruppe Online-Interventionen zur Prävention und Behandlung von psychischen Erkrankungen eingesetzt. Das PLUS(Personality and Living of University Students)-Programm ist ein webbasiertes gezieltes Präventionsprogramm, das in zwei europäischen Ländern evaluiert wurde. Der Anteil der Studierenden, die das Programm vollständig durchlaufen haben, war relativ gering. Diese Studie zielt darauf ab, die Meinungen von Studierenden zum PLUS-Programm besser zu verstehen, um dadurch zu einer Verbesserung von Interventionsdesign, Adhärenz und Dissemination beizutragen.
Methoden
Es wurden semistrukturierte Interviews mit Studierenden aus Großbritannien (n = 10) und Österreich (n = 14) durchgeführt, die zuvor Zugang zu PLUS hatten. Sie wurden bezüglich ihrer Wahrnehmung des Programms, zu ihren Erfahrungen damit und zu Verbesserungsvorschlägen befragt. Die Ergebnisse wurden mittels Themenanalyse analysiert.
Ergebnisse
Die Befragten hatten wenig Erfahrung mit Online-Präventionsprogrammen, weshalb nur wenige von ihnen vor ihrer Anmeldung spezifische Erwartungen zum PLUS-Programm hatten. Das Fehlen von professioneller Begleitung und Verbindlichkeit aufgrund des Online-Charakters des Programms erschwerten vielen Studierenden eine regelmäßige Nutzung, wobei häufige Email-Reminders halfen, dem entgegenzuwirken. Als positiv wurde die Flexibilität in der Anwendung gesehen. Zudem erkannten die Studierenden das Potenzial des Programms, positive Veränderungen in Gedanken und Verhalten zu erzielen.
Schlussfolgerung
Insgesamt wurde PLUS von Studierenden trotz hoher Abbruchrate positiv beurteilt. Obwohl PLUS als ein nützliches Programm gesehen wurde, das im Setting Universität integriert werden sollte, wurden einige Verbesserungen vorgeschlagen, um die Programmbindung zu erhöhen. Dieses Feedback kann helfen, die Teilnahmerate und Adhärenz bei zukünftigen Präventionsprogrammen zu verbessern.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kaltenthaler E, Sutcliffe P, Parry G, Beverley C, Rees A, Ferriter M. The acceptability to patients of computerized cognitive behaviour therapy for depression: a systematic review. Psychol Med. 2008;38(11):1521–30.
Rost T, Stein J, Löbner M, Kersting A, Luck-Sikorski C, Riedel-Heller SG. User acceptance of computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for depression: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(9):e309.
Eisenberg D, Downs MF, Golberstein E, Zivin K. Stigma and help seeking for mental health among college students. Med Care Res Rev. 2009;66(5):522–41.
Eisenberg D, Golberstein E, Gollust SE. Help-seeking and access to mental health care in a university student population. Med Care. 2007;45(7):594–601.
Ebert DD, Mortier P, Kaehlke F, Bruffaerts R, Baumeister H, Auerbach RP, et al. Barriers of mental health treatment utilization among first-year college students: First cross-national results from the WHO World Mental Health International College Student Initiative. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2019;28(2):e1782.
Davies EB, Morriss R, Glazebrook C. Computer-delivered and web-based interventions to improve depression, anxiety, and psychological well-being of university students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(5):e130.
Ebert DD, Cuijpers P, Muñoz RF, Baumeister H. Prevention of mental health disorders using internet-and mobile-based interventions: a narrative review and recommendations for future research. Front Psychiatry. 2017;8:116.
Kenardy J, McCafferty K, Rosa V. Internet-delivered indicated prevention for anxiety disorders: Six-month follow-up. Clin Psychol. 2006;10(1):39–42.
Kenardy J, McCafferty K, Rosa V. Internet-delivered indicated prevention for anxiety disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Behav Cognit Psychother. 2003;31(3):279–89.
Paschall MJ, Antin T, Ringwalt CL, Saltz RF. Evaluation of an Internet-based alcohol misuse prevention course for college freshmen: Findings of a randomized multi-campus trial. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41(3):300–8.
Ma L, Zhang Y, Cui Z. Mindfulness-based Interventions for prevention of depressive symptoms in university students: a meta-analytic review. Mindfulness. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01192-w.
Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O, Jin R, Merikangas KR, Walters EE. Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(6):593–602.
Potterton R, Richards K, Allen K, Schmidt U. Eating disorders during emerging adulthood: a systematic scoping review. Front Psychol. 2019;10:3062.
Royal College of psychiatrists R. Mental health of students in higher education. 2011. https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/docs/default-source/improving-care/better-mh-policy/college-reports/college-report-cr166.pdf?sfvrsn=d5fa2c24_2. Accessed: Jan 2018.
NICE. Common mental health problems: identification and pathways to care. 2011.
Brown P. The invisible problem?: improving students’ mental health. Higher Education Policy Institute; 2016.
Thorley C. Not by degrees: not by degrees: improving student mental health in the UK’s universities. London: IPPR; 2017.
Musiat P, Goldstone P, Tarrier N. Understanding the acceptability of e‑mental health-attitudes and expectations towards computerised self-help treatments for mental health problems. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14(1):109.
Farrer L, Gulliver A, Chan JK, Bennett K, Griffiths KM. A virtual mental health clinic for university students: a qualitative study of end-user service needs and priorities. J Med Intern Res Ment Health. 2015;2(1):e2.
Berry N, Lobban F, Emsley R, Bucci S. Acceptability of interventions delivered online and through mobile phones for people who experience severe mental health problems: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(5):e121.
Donkin L, Glozier N. Motivators and motivations to persist with online psychological interventions: a qualitative study of treatment completers. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(3):e91.
Beattie A, Shaw A, Kaur S, Kessler D. Primary-care patients’ expectations and experiences of online cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: a qualitative study. Health Expect. 2009;12(1):45–59.
Fleischmann RJ, Harrer M, Zarski A‑C, Baumeister H, Lehr D, Ebert DD. Patients’ experiences in a guided internet-and app-based stress intervention for college students: a qualitative study. Internet Interv. 2018;12:130–40.
Melville KM, Casey LM, Kavanagh DJ. Dropout from Internet-based treatment for psychological disorders. Br J Clin Psychol. 2010;49(4):455–71.
Linardon J, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M. Attrition and adherence in smartphone-delivered interventions for mental health problems: a systematic and meta-analytic review. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2020;88(1):1.
Muñoz RF, Bunge EL, Chen K, Schueller SM, Bravin JI, Shaughnessy EA, et al. Massive open online interventions: a novel model for delivering behavioral-health services worldwide. Clin Psychol Sci. 2016;4(2):194–205.
John OP, Naumann LP, Soto CJ. Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. In: John OP, Robins RW, Pervin LA (Eds.), Handbook of personality: theory and research; Vol. 3. 2008. pp. 114–158.
Frost RO, Marten P, Lahart C, Rosenblate RJ. The dimensions of perfectionism. Cogn Ther Res. 1990;14(5):449–68.
Woicik PA, Stewart SH, Pihl RO, Conrod PJ. The substance use risk profile scale: a scale measuring traits linked to reinforcement-specific substance use profiles. Addict Behav. 2009;34(12):1042–55.
Musiat P, Conrod P, Treasure J, Tylee A, Williams C, Schmidt U. Targeted prevention of common mental health disorders in university students: randomised controlled trial of a transdiagnostic trait-focused web-based intervention. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(4):e93621.
Musiat P, Hoffmann L, Schmidt U. Personalised computerised feedback in E‑mental health. J Ment Health. 2012;21(4):346–54.
Musiat P, Potterton R, Gordon G, Spencer L, Zeiler M, Waldherr K, et al. Web-based indicated prevention of common mental disorders in university students in four European countries—Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Internet Interv. 2019;16:35–42.
Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.
Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ. 2006;332(7538):413–6.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
Herrero R, Mira A, Cormo G, Etchemendy E, Baños R, García-Palacios A, et al. An Internet based intervention for improving resilience and coping strategies in university students: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Internet Interv. 2019;16:43–51.
Griffiths F, Lindenmeyer A, Powell J, Lowe P, Thorogood M. Why are health care interventions delivered over the internet? A systematic review of the published literature. J Med Internet Res. 2006;8(2):e10.
Horgan A, Sweeney J. Young students’ use of the Internet for mental health information and support. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2010;17(2):117–23.
Fernández-Álvarez J, Díaz-García A, González-Robles A, Baños R, García-Palacios A, Botella C. Dropping out of a transdiagnostic online intervention: a qualitative analysis of client’s experiences. Internet Interv. 2017;10:29–38.
Chan JK, Farrer LM, Gulliver A, Bennett K, Griffiths KM. University students’ views on the perceived benefits and drawbacks of seeking help for mental health problems on the Internet: a qualitative study. JMIR Hum Factors. 2016;3(1):e3.
Palmqvist B, Carlbring P, Andersson G. Internet-delivered treatments with or without therapist input: does the therapist factor have implications for efficacy and cost? Expert Rev Pharmacoeconom Outcomes Res. 2007;7(3):291–7.
Richards D, Richardson T. Computer-based psychological treatments for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32(4):329–42.
Titov N, Dear BF, Johnston L, Lorian C, Zou J, Wootton B, et al. Improving adherence and clinical outcomes in self-guided internet treatment for anxiety and depression: randomised controlled trial. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(7):e62873.
Cornish PA, Berry G, Benton S, Barros-Gomes P, Johnson D, Ginsburg R, et al. Meeting the mental health needs of today’s college student: reinventing services through Stepped Care 2.0. Psychol Serv. 2017;14(4):428.
Acknowledgements
Ulrike Schmidt is supported by a Senior Investigator award from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and receives salary support from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health, South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust and Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London. Rachel Potterton is funded by a PhD studentship from the NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health. The views expressed herein are not those of NIHR or the NHS.
Funding
This project received supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 634757.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Ulrike Schmidt, Karin Waldherr, Madeleine Irish, Michael Zeiler and Stefanie Kuso were each involved in the study design. Madeleine Irish wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed revisions to the manuscript. All authors and read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
M. Irish, M. Zeiler, S. Kuso, P. Musiat, R. Potterton, G. Wagner, A. Karwautz, K. Waldherr, and U. Schmidt declare that they have no competing interests.
Ethical standards
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
K. Waldherr and U. Schmidt are senior authors.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Irish, M., Zeiler, M., Kuso, S. et al. Students’ perceptions of an online mental health intervention: a qualitative interview study. Neuropsychiatr 35, 177–186 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40211-020-00383-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40211-020-00383-5