Author:
Richardson Karyn,Petukhova Rachel,Hughes Sam,Pitt Joseph,Yücel Murat,Segrave Rebecca
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
While lifestyle medicine can be highly effective for treating a range of mental illnesses these approaches are grossly underutilised and have not been systematically implemented into health care systems. Understanding the acceptability of lifestyle medicine is a critical first step to remediate this. This study evaluated the acceptability of lifestyle medicine relative to pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, and explore perspectives of people with and without lived experience of mental illness.
Methods
Six hundred and forty-nine adult Australian residents (62.6% female; 53.6% with a lifetime diagnosis of mental illness) completed an online survey based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability assessing the acceptability of lifestyle medicine, pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for treating mental illness.
Results
Most participants felt positive about lifestyle medicine (76.9%) and felt that such approaches aligned with their personal values (74.9%). They understood how lifestyle medicine worked (86.4%) and believed it would be effective (69.6%). Lived experience of mental illness was associated with greater perceived burden and lower self-efficacy to engage in lifestyle medicine activities (both p < 0.001). While there was a clear preference for psychotherapy and lifestyle medicine over pharmacotherapy, pharmacotherapy was perceived as least effortful (p < .001) and participants were least confident in their ability to engage in lifestyle medicine (p < 0.05).
Conclusion
The findings indicate strong acceptability of lifestyle medicine for mental illness, a preference for non-pharmacological treatment approaches, and an understanding of the challenges associated with making long-term healthy lifestyle modifications amongst people who have lived experience of mental illness.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference60 articles.
1. The Lancet Global Health. Mental health matters. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(11):e1352.
2. GBD 2019 Mental Disorders Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of 12 mental disorders in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Psychiatry. 2022;9(2):137–50.
3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health expenditure Australia 2020–21. 2022. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/langlo/PIIS2214-109X(20)30432-0.pdf.
4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health expenditure Australia 2010–11. 2012. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/langlo/PIIS2214-109X(20)30432-0.pdf.
5. Rajkumar RP. The correlates of government expenditure on mental health services: an analysis of data from 78 countries and regions. Cureus. 2022;14(8):e28284.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献