Effect of a peer-led intervention combining mental health promotion with coping-strategy-based workshops on mental health awareness, help-seeking behavior, and wellbeing among university students in Hong Kong.

BACKGROUND: The psychological well-being of university students is an important factor in successfully coping with the demands of academic life. This study aimed to assess the impact of a peer-led intervention of mental health promotion combined with coping-strategy-based group workshops on mental health awareness and help-seeking behavior among university students in Hong Kong. METHOD: A mixed-method concurrent design was used for this study. Quantitative data, based on one-group pretest-posttest design, were collected using Mental Health Knowledge Schedule Questionnaire to assess mental health awareness, and Attitude Towards Seeking Professional Help Questionnaire-Short Form to examine help-seeking behavior of university students from The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Qualitative data were collected from written post-activity reflections and focus group discussions which were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 62 university students (mean age: 23.2 ± 5.1 years) were included in this study. Mental health awareness was significantly improved (p = 0.015, 95% Confidence Interval of - 2.670, - 0.297) after program implementation. Help-seeking behavior mean score increased from pretest to posttest, however, no significant difference was observed (p = 0.188, 95% CI = - 1.775, 0.355). Qualitative analysis revealed that the program helped participants learn about coping strategies to help themselves and others with mental health challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The peer-led intervention provided a positive impact through increased mental health awareness and knowledge of coping strategies on self-help and helping others among university students. Further study could focus on the impact of the program when applied regularly throughout the entire academic year.

Efficacy and safety of evogliptin versus sitagliptin as an add-on therapy in Indian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin: A 24-week randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority, EVOLUTION INDIA study.

AIM: This study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of evogliptin versus sitagliptin, when added to background metformin therapy in Indian patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. METHOD: Overall, 184 patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (7% ≤ HbA1c < 10%) receiving ≥8 weeks of stable metformin monotherapy (≥1 g/day), were randomized to receive add-on treatment (evogliptin 5 mg or sitagliptin 100 mg) for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to 12 weeks (non-inferiority margin: <0.35). RESULTS: Mean reductions in HbA1c at 12 weeks in evogliptin- and sitagliptin-treated patients were -0.37 (1.06) and -0.32 (1.14), respectively. The adjusted mean difference between treatment groups was -0.022 (95% CI: -0.374, 0.330; P = 0.901), that demonstrated non-inferiority. Reductions in FPG and PPG were similar between evogliptin and sitagliptin at 12 and 24 weeks. Changes in body weight were comparable between the treatment groups. Patients achieving target HbA1c < 7.0% (evogliptin, 26.7% vs. sitagliptin, 20%) was almost equal in both groups. Treatment-emergent adverse events occured in 52 patients (evogliptin, 25% and sitagliptin, 31.5%) and were generally mild. CONCLUSIONS: Evogliptin was non-inferior to sitagliptin in HbA1c reduction. It effectively improved glycemic control and was well tolerated in type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled by metformin alone.