‘Lifts your spirits,lifts your mind’: A co-produced mixed-methods exploration of the benefits of green and blue spaces for mental wellbeing

Introduction

Mental health problems are a considerable public health issue and spending time in nature has been promoted as a way to access a range of psychological benefits leading to the development of nature-based interventions for people with severe and enduring mental health problems. Less, however, is understood about the potential benefits and efficacy of day-to-day routine access to outdoor green and blue spaces for mental health service users.

Methods

Using a mixed-methods design between April and October 2021, we explored the benefits and barriers to spending time outdoors with a purposive sample of mental health service users (N = 11) using qualitative interviews and an online general population survey (N = 1791). Qualitative evidence highlighted the restorative benefits of nature and identified a number of barriers associated with fears around personal safety, social anxiety, fatigue and lack of motivation. COVID-19 had also restricted access to green and blue spaces. Having social contact and support encouraged people to spend time outdoors. In the quantitative survey, self-report and standardised measures (the Patient Health Questionnaire and the Warwick–Edinburgh Wellbeing Scale) were used to assess past and current mental wellbeing.

Findings

Statistically significant differences were found between wellbeing and the use of green and blue spaces. Those with mental health problems spent time outdoors because they: felt guilty; wanted to reduce their anxiety; or rely on someone for encouragement. Those without mental health problems endorsed more positively framed reasons including relaxation, improving physical health or getting exercise. Barriers for people with mental health problems involved safety concerns, feeling anxious and having a poor self-image. These findings give insight into motivations for an outdoor activity to help inform the design of public mental health interventions.

Conclusion

Further work is required to improve access and safety to promote the benefits of green and blue spaces for everyone.

Patient or Public Contribution

The research team included expert experienced researchers with a mental health service provider (Praxis Care) and they were involved in the development of the research idea, funding application, design, data collection, analysis, writing up and dissemination activities.     

Optic nerve sheath fenestration for treating papilloedema in the era of cerebral venous sinus stenting

Background

Pseudotumour cerebri (PTC) is the syndrome of intracranial hypertension without intracranial mass or hydrocephalus and is the commonest cause of papilloedema seen in many eye clinics. In the last 10 years, we have increasingly used TSS in patients whose papilloedema was not well controlled with medical treatment and have done fewer ONSFs. Here, we review our experience at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Sydney with ONSF in 35 patients over the period 2002–2021.

Methods

Retrospective case series of 35 patients, 30 of whom had primary PTC [i.e., idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH)] and 5 with secondary PTC.

Results

Eighteen patients had bilateral ONSF and 17 patients unilateral ONSF, in each case of the worse eye. Thirteen patients then underwent transverse sinus stenting (TSS), in each case following ONSF. The primary outcome measures were visual acuity (VA) and mean deviation (MD) on visual field (VF) testing. MD improved by 5 dB or more in 34 of 70 total eyes (48.6%); VA improved by 0.2 logMAR (two lines on Snellen chart) or more in 21 eyes (30%), and by both in 15 eyes (21.4%). Final MD was −10 dB or better in 38 eyes (54.3%); final VA was 0.3 (6/12) or better in 54 eyes (77.1%), and both in 39 eyes (55.7%).

Conclusions

The results confirm that ONSF can relieve papilloedoema in both eyes and improve both VF and VA, even in cases of fulminant PTC with severe acute visual impairment.