A Direct-to-Public Peer Support Program (Big White Wall) Versus Web-Based Information to Aid the Self-management of Depression and Anxiety: Results and Challenges of an Automated Randomized Controlled Trial

• Published in: Journal of medical Internet research Vol. 23; no. 4; p. e23487
• Main Authors: Morriss, Richard, Kaylor-Hughes, Catherine, Rawsthorne, Matthew, Coulson, Neil, Simpson, Sandra, Guo, Boliang, James, Marilyn, Lathe, James, Moran, Paul, Tata, Laila J, Williams, Laura
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Canada JMIR Publications 23.04.2021
• Subjects: Adult; Anxiety - therapy; Anxiety Disorders - therapy; Depression - therapy; Female; Humans; Internet; Original Paper; Self-Management; United Kingdom; United Kingdom; anxiety; population reach; productivity; mobile phone; digital mental health; depression; peer support
• ISSN: 1438-8871; 1439-4456; 1438-8871
• DOI: 10.2196/23487

Effective help for depression and anxiety reaches a small proportion of people who might benefit from it. The scale of the problem suggests the need for effective, safe web-based public health services delivered directly to the public. One model, the Big White Wall (BWW), offers peer support at low cost. As these interventions are delivered digitally, we tested whether a randomized controlled trial (RCT) intervention could also be fully delivered and evaluated digitally. This study aims to determine the reach, feasibility, acceptability, baseline costs, and outcomes of a public health campaign for an automated RCT of the BWW, providing digital peer support and information, compared with a standard website used by the National Health Service Moodzone (MZ), to people with probable mild-to-moderate depression and anxiety disorder. The primary outcome was the change in self-rated well-being at 6 weeks, measured using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale. An 18-month campaign was conducted across Nottinghamshire, the United Kingdom (target population 914,000) to advertise the trial directly to the public through general marketing, web-based and social media sources, health services, other public services, and third-sector groups. The population reach of this campaign was examined by the number of people accessing the study website and self-registering to the study. A pragmatic, parallel-group, single-blind RCT was then conducted using a fully automated trial website in which eligible participants were randomized to receive either 6 months of access to BWW or signposted to MZ. Those eligible for participation were aged >16 years with probable mild-to-moderate depression or anxiety disorders. Of 6483 visitors to the study website, 1510 (23.29%) were eligible. Overall, 790 of 1510 (52.32%) visitors participated. Of 790 visitors, 397 (50.3%) were randomized to BWW and 393 (49.7%) to MZ. Their mean age was 38 (SD 13.8) years, 81.0% (640/790) were female, 93.4% (738/790) were White, and 47.4% (271/572) had no contact with health services in the previous 3 months. We estimated 3-month productivity losses of £1001.01 (95% CI 868.75-1133.27; US $1380.79; 95% CI 1198.35-1563.23) per person for those employed. Only 16.6% (131/790) participants completed the primary outcome assessment. There were no differences in the primary or secondary outcomes between the 2 groups. Most participants reached and those eligible for this trial of digital interventions were White women not in recent contact with health services and whose productivity losses represent a significant annual societal burden. A fully automated RCT recruiting directly from the public failed to recruit and retain sufficient participants to test the clinical effectiveness of this digital intervention, primarily because it did not personally engage participants and explain how these unfamiliar interventions might benefit them. International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 12673428; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12673428. RR2-10.2196/resprot.8061.