Dataset Information

Effectiveness of providing university students with a mindfulness-based intervention to increase resilience to stress: 1-year follow-up of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is concern that increasing demand for student mental health services reflects deteriorating student well-being. We designed a pragmatic, parallel, single-blinded randomised controlled trial hypothesising that providing mindfulness courses to university students would promote their resilience to stress up to a year later. Here we present 1-year follow-up outcomes.

Methods

University of Cambridge students without severe mental illness or crisis were randomised (1:1, remote software-generated random numbers), to join an 8-week mindfulness course adapted for university students (Mindfulness Skills for Students (MSS)), or to mental health support as usual (SAU).

Results

We randomised 616 students; 53% completed the 1-year follow-up questionnaire. Self-reported psychological distress and mental well-being improved in the MSS arm for up to 1 year compared to SAU (p<0.001). Effects were smaller than during the examination period. No significant differences between arms were detected in the use of University Counselling Service and other support resources, but there was a trend for MSS participants having milder needs. There were no differences in students' workload management; MSS participants made more donations. Home practice had positive dose-response effects; few participants meditated. No adverse effects related to self-harm, suicidality or harm to others were detected.

Conclusion

Loss to follow-up is a limitation, but evidence suggests beneficial effects on students' average psychological distress that last for at least a year. Effects are on average larger at stressful times, consistent with the hypothesis that this type of mindfulness training increases resilience to stress.

Trial registration number

ACTRN12615001160527.

SUBMITTER: Galante J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7116569 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of providing university students with a mindfulness-based intervention to increase resilience to stress: 1-year follow-up of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Galante Julieta J Stochl Jan J Dufour Géraldine G Vainre Maris M Wagner Adam Peter AP Jones Peter Brian PB

Journal of epidemiology and community health 20200910 2

<h4>Background</h4>There is concern that increasing demand for student mental health services reflects deteriorating student well-being. We designed a pragmatic, parallel, single-blinded randomised controlled trial hypothesising that providing mindfulness courses to university students would promote their resilience to stress up to a year later. Here we present 1-year follow-up outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>University of Cambridge students without severe mental illness or crisis were randomised (1:1, ...[more]

PMID: 32913130

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe rising number of young people going to university has led to concerns about an increasing demand for student mental health services. We aimed to assess whether provision of mindfulness courses to university students would improve their resilience to stress.MethodsWe did this pragmatic randomised controlled trial at the University of Cambridge, UK. Students aged 18 years or older with no severe mental illness or crisis (self-assessed) were randomly assigned (1:1), via remote survey software using computer-generated random numbers, to receive either an 8 week mindfulness course adapted for university students (Mindfulness Skills for Students [MSS]) plus mental health support as usual, or mental health support as usual alone. Participants and the study management team were aware of group allocation, but allocation was concealed from the researchers, outcome assessors, and study statistician. The primary outcome was self-reported psychological distress during the examination period, as measured with the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM), with higher scores indicating more distress. The primary analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12615001160527.FindingsBetween Sept 28, 2015, and Jan 15, 2016, we randomly assigned 616 students to the MSS group (n=309) or the support as usual group (n=307). 453 (74%) participants completed the CORE-OM during the examination period and 182 (59%) MSS participants completed at least half of the course. MSS reduced distress scores during the examination period compared with support as usual, with mean CORE-OM scores of 0·87 (SD 0·50) in 237 MSS participants versus 1·11 (0·57) in 216 support as usual participants (adjusted mean difference -0·14, 95% CI -0·22 to -0·06; p=0·001), showing a moderate effect size (β -0·44, 95% CI -0·60 to -0·29; p<0·0001). 123 (57%) of 214 participants in the support as usual group had distress scores above an accepted clinical threshold compared with 88 (37%) of 235 participants in the MSS group. On average, six students (95% CI four to ten) needed to be offered the MSS course to prevent one from experiencing clinical levels of distress. No participants had adverse reactions related to self-harm, suicidality, or harm to others.InterpretationOur findings show that provision of mindfulness training could be an effective component of a wider student mental health strategy. Further comparative effectiveness research with inclusion of controls for non-specific effects is needed to define a range of additional, effective interventions to increase resilience to stress in university students.FundingUniversity of Cambridge and National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East of England.

Project description:ObjectiveIncreasing numbers of young people attending university has raised concerns about the capacity of student mental health services to support them. We conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to explore whether provision of an 8 week mindfulness course adapted for university students (Mindfulness Skills for Students-MSS), compared with university mental health support as usual (SAU), reduced psychological distress during the examination period. Here, we conduct an economic evaluation of MSS+SAU compared with SAU.Design and settingEconomic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic, parallel, single-blinded RCT comparing provision of MSS+SAU to SAU.Participants616 university students randomised.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary economic evaluation assessed the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the university counselling service. Costs relate to staff time required to deliver counselling service offerings. QALYs were derived from the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Dimension 6 Dimension (CORE-6D) preference based tool, which uses responses to six items of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM; primary clinical outcome measure). Primary follow-up duration was 5 and 7 months for the two recruitment cohorts.ResultsIt was estimated to cost £1584 (2022 prices) to deliver an MSS course to 30 students, £52.82 per student. Both costs (adjusted mean difference: £48, 95% CI £40-£56) and QALYs (adjusted mean difference: 0.014, 95% CI 0.008 to 0.021) were significantly higher in the MSS arm compared with SAU. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £3355, with a very high (99.99%) probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY.ConclusionsMSS leads to significantly improved outcomes at a moderate additional cost. The ICER of £3355 per QALY suggests that MSS is cost-effective when compared with the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence thresholds of £20 000 per QALY.Trial registration numberAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12615001160527.

Project description:The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of sexual and physical assault among university students and its association with alcohol use. The research is part of a wider cohort study (Spit for ScienceTM) at a large public university in the United States. The follow-up data include the first two cohorts (2011, 2012; n = 5,170). The dependent variables were victim of sexual assault and victim of physical assault. The independent variables were alcohol dependence and abuse according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.), cannabis use, residence, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and previous experience of sexual assault and/or physical assault. We used multilevel logistic regression for repeated measures. All data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models. Incidence rates of sexual and physical assault (per 100 students a year) were 15.1 and 27.6 among nonabusers/dependents versus 36.4 and 56.7 among alcohol-dependent females at the first year, and 2.8 and 4.7 versus 7.7 and 23.1 at the third year; while in males, incident rates were 6.0 and 3.1 versus 18.5 and 66.6, and 2.3 and 7.4 versus 18.9 and 15.1, respectively. Our results show that alcohol abuse and dependence constitute risk factors to be victim of sexual assault in males (odds ratio [OR] = 2.21 and OR = 2.73) and alcohol dependence in females (OR = 2.16). Similarly, alcohol abuse and dependence are risk factors to physical assault among both males (OR = 1.52 and OR = 2.03) and females (OR = 1.70 and OR = 2.88). Ethnicity, sexual orientation, and whether the individual had been victimized in the past were associated with sexual assault. Regarding physical assault, cannabis use and past victimization are also risk factors. Our study has shown that assault victimization is strongly related to alcohol abuse and dependence diagnoses in both genders. Ethnicity and sexual orientation are also associated to both assaults. Our results show that incidence rates of both types of assaults were clearly higher in the first 6 months of university, probably explained by the novel and potentially risky environment.

Project description:BackgroundPsychological distress in University settings has grown and became a public health concern. In this context, contemplative practices such as mindfulness have been proposed as a strategy to help students on stress management.MethodsForty university students (20 female), aged between 18 to 30 years (mean = 24.15; SD = 3.56), with no previous experience with meditation or yoga were recruited at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte and randomized to a mindfulness training (MT) or active control (AC) groups. We analyzed measures of anxiety, affect, stress, as well as state and trait mindfulness in order to evaluate the effects of trait mindfulness and a brief mindfulness intervention in forty healthy young students. Participants were classified as Low (n = 27, females = 13) or High (n = 13, females = 7) Trait Mindfulness by k-means clustering and compared between them using Wilcoxon sum rank test. Furthermore, the sample was randomly allocated to an AC (n = 20, females = 10) or a MT (n = 20, females = 10) group, and mixed analysis of variance was performed to analyze the effect of interventions. The mechanisms and role of trait mindfulness in the intervention was assessed by a moderated mediation analysis.ResultsWe found that High Trait individuals have lower anxiety trait, anxiety state and perceived stress levels. Only the MT group reduced their anxiety state and perceived stress after the intervention and increased their state mindfulness. Both groups reduced negative affect and cortisol, and no change was found in positive affect. Moderated mediation analysis showed that the training-induced change in state mindfulness mediated the increase in positive affect and the decrease in perceived stress and cortisol, regardless of trait mindfulness. For anxiety state the decrease only occurred in individuals with High Trait Mindfulness.ConclusionsTogether, these results suggest that higher trait mindfulness is associated with low levels of psychological distress and that a brief mindfulness-based intervention seems to be useful to reduce distress measures in university students.Trial registrationReBEC, U1111-1194-8661. Registered 28 March 2017-Retrospectively registered, http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-7b8yh8.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Physical exercise has been shown to be effective in relation to fatigue, aerobic fitness, and lower body strength in men with prostate cancer. However, research into the clinically relevant effects of interventions conducted in heterogeneous patient populations and in real-life clinical practice settings is warranted. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We conducted a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel randomised controlled trial in 5 Danish urological departments. Recruitment began in May 2015, the first participant was randomised in June 2015, and the last participant was included in February 2017. In total, 214 men with prostate cancer were randomly assigned to either 6 months of free-of-charge football training twice weekly at a local club (football group [FG]) (n = 109) or usual care (usual care group [UG]) (n = 105), including brief information on physical activity recommendations at randomisation. Participants were on average 68.4 (SD 6.2) years old, 157 (73%) were retired, 87 (41%) were on castration-based treatment, 19 (9%) had received chemotherapy, and 41 (19%) had skeletal metastases at baseline. In this 1-year follow-up study, we evaluated the effects of community-based football training on the following outcomes: primary outcome, quality of life; secondary outcomes: continuation of football after 6 months, hip and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), mental health score, fat and lean body mass, and safety outcomes, i.e., fractures, falls, and hospital admissions. Intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were conducted. No statistically significant between-group difference was observed in change in prostate-cancer-specific quality of life (ITT: 1.9 points [95% CI -1.9 to 5.8], p = 0.325; PP: 3.6 points [95% CI -0.9 to 8.2], p = 0.119). A statistically significant between-group difference was observed in change in total hip BMD, in favour of FG (0.007 g/cm2 [95% CI 0.004 to 0.013], p = 0.037). No differences were observed in change in lumbar spine BMD or lean body mass. Among patients allocated to football, 59% chose to continue playing football after the end of the 6-month intervention period. At 1-year follow-up in the PP population, FG participants had more improvement on the Mental Component Summary (2.9 [95% CI 0.0 to 5.7], p = 0.048 points higher) than UG participants, as well as a greater loss of fat mass (-0.9 kg [95% CI -1.7 to -0.1], p = 0.029). There were no differences between groups in relation to fractures or falls. Hospital admissions were more frequent in UG compared to FG (33 versus 20; the odds ratio based on PP analysis was 0.34 for FG compared to UG). There were 3 deaths in FG and 4 in UG. Main limitations of the study were the physically active control group and assessment of physical activity by means of self-report. CONCLUSIONS:In this trial, participants allocated to football appeared to have improved hip BMD and fewer hospital admissions. Men who played football more than once a week for 1 year lost fat mass and reported improved mental health. Community-based football proved to be acceptable, even when club membership was not subsidised. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02430792.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of providing university students with a mindfulness-based intervention to increase resilience to stress: 1-year follow-up of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration number

Publications

Effectiveness of providing university students with a mindfulness-based intervention to increase resilience to stress: 1-year follow-up of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets