From Digital Mental Health Interventions to Digital "Addiction": Where the Two Fields Converge

Editorial: Control alt delete - technology and children's mental health

With international contributions from Denmark, Peru, Italy, Turkey, Estonia, Russia, Canada, the USA, Australia and the UK, this special issue offers insights and evidence about the technology's ability to act as a force of good and a source of harm for young people's mental health. As we better understand the complex and bidirectional relationship between technology and mental health, we need to move beyond dichotomous narratives about it being good or bad; it is both, depending on how it is used. Collective responsibility across technology companies, researchers, public services and community organisations, parents and the young people themselves can make a difference in the way technology is used to protect and improve mental health.

A Framework for the Implementation of Digital Mental Health Interventions: The Importance of Feasibility and Acceptability Research

Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have the potential to serve a significantly wider portion of the population in need of mental health services. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has especially highlighted the exacerbation of mental health disparities among minoritized populations. Innovations and research on DMHIs continue to expand, reinforcing the need for a more systemic process of DMHI implementation. In practice, DMHI implementation often skips the fundamental steps of conducting acceptability and feasibility studies. We propose a DMHI implementation framework that identifies an acceptability and feasibility study as an essential first step, simultaneously centering equitable processes that address populations disproportionately affected by mental illness.

Digital interventions in mental health: evidence syntheses and economic modelling

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations provide evidence on whether or not digital interventions offer value for money, based on their costs and outcomes relative to the costs and outcomes of alternatives.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Evaluate and summarise published economic studies about digital interventions across different technologies, therapies, comparators and mental health conditions; (2) synthesise clinical evidence about digital interventions for an exemplar mental health condition; (3) construct an economic model for the same exemplar mental health condition using the previously synthesised clinical evidence; and (4) consult with stakeholders about how they understand and assess the value of digital interventions.

METHODS

We completed four work packages: (1) a systematic review and quality assessment of economic studies about digital interventions; (2) a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder; (3) an economic model and value-of-information analysis on digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder; and (4) a series of knowledge exchange face-to-face and digital seminars with stakeholders.

RESULTS

In work package 1, we reviewed 76 economic evaluations: 11 economic models and 65 within-trial analyses. Although the results of the studies are not directly comparable because they used different methods, the overall picture suggests that digital interventions are likely to be cost-effective, compared with no intervention and non-therapeutic controls, whereas the value of digital interventions compared with face-to-face therapy or printed manuals is unclear. In work package 2, we carried out two network meta-analyses of 20 randomised controlled trials of digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder with a total of 2350 participants. The results were used to inform our economic model, but when considered on their own they were inconclusive because of the very wide confidence intervals. In work package 3, our decision-analytic model found that digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder were associated with lower net monetary benefit than medication and face-to-face therapy, but greater net monetary benefit than non-therapeutic controls and no intervention. Value for money was driven by clinical outcomes rather than by intervention costs, and a value-of-information analysis suggested that uncertainty in the treatment effect had the greatest value (£12.9B). In work package 4, stakeholders identified several areas of benefits and costs of digital interventions that are important to them, including safety, sustainability and reducing waiting times. Four factors may influence their decisions to use digital interventions, other than costs and outcomes: increasing patient choice, reaching underserved populations, enabling continuous care and accepting the 'inevitability of going digital'.

LIMITATIONS

There was substantial uncertainty around effect estimates of digital interventions compared with alternatives. This uncertainty was driven by the small number of studies informing most comparisons, the small samples in some of these studies and the studies' high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital interventions may offer good value for money as an alternative to 'doing nothing' or 'doing something non-therapeutic' (e.g. monitoring or having a general discussion), but their added value compared with medication, face-to-face therapy and printed manuals is uncertain. Clinical outcomes rather than intervention costs drive 'value for money'.

FUTURE WORK

There is a need to develop digital interventions that are more effective, rather than just cheaper, than their alternatives.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018105837.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Development of a casual video game (Match Emoji) with psychological well-being concepts for young adolescents

Digital interventions for mental health and well-being have been shown to be effective in trials, yet uptake and retention in real-world settings are often disappointing. A more significant impact may be achieved by building interventions that are closer to how target groups use technology to support their own psychological well-being. Casual video games may be poised to offer an opportunity in this area as they are a highly popular activity among young people. We propose that mental health content can be integrated into the explicit content and the implicit processes used in casual video games. In this paper, we describe the design and core processes of Match Emoji, a casual video game designed to support the development of psychological well-being via gameplay and micro-messages. The iterative development of Match Emoji involved various phases, including a systematic review of the literature, consultation with target users, clinicians, game developers, and close reading of the literature. Expert collaboration was sought throughout the process to ensure gameplay and messages matched behaviour change and learning theories. An acceptability and feasibility study of Match Emoji will inform a randomised controlled trial in the future.

Text4Support Mobile-Based Programming for Individuals Accessing Addictions and Mental Health Services-Retroactive Program Analysis at Baseline, 12 Weeks, and 6 Months

Objective: Where traditional approaches fall short, widely accessible and accepted, yet under leveraged, digital technologies such as text messaging present novel opportunities to solve a range of health care solutions. The following provides a preliminary analysis of the Text4Support program, a text-messaging intervention using the principles of cognitive behavioral therapy, which seeks to support the health and well-being of individuals seeking support for addiction or mental health concerns. The goal of this study was to assess whether the Text4Support program improved the perceived overall mental well-being of participants. Methods: The evaluation analyzes survey responses of individuals who were enrolled in the Text4Support program beginning in July 2019, who had completed the 6-months program by May 2020. Participants were asked to provide responses to three surveys during their time in the program-at baseline, 12-weeks and 6-months, which included questions documenting demographic information, general satisfaction with the program, and a participants' level of "global distress" through use of the Clinical Outcomes Routine Evaluation System (CORE-10)-a validated brief 10-item assessment and outcome measurement tool used to assess conditions including anxiety, depression, physical problems, and risk to self. Results and Conclusions: This data set did not include a large enough sample of participants to reach statistical significance. Nevertheless, the study provides some preliminary analysis, and identifies opportunities for the future analysis and research.