No abstract

Background: Increasing levels of risky alcohol consumption in older men observed in many countries, combined with trends for increased alcohol-related misuse by men during COVID, indicate a need to examinealcohol use by older men during the pandemic. Aim: To examine the prevalence and predictors of increased and hazardous alcohol consumption in older South Australian men during COVID-19 restrictions. Method: Data collected in the latest (eighth) wave of the Men Androgen Inflammation Lifestyle Environment and Stress (MAILES) cohort study were interrogated. Participants were 746 community-dwelling older men (mean age 69 years) who completed a self-report survey on mental health, coping, COVID-related worries, and alcohol consumption during pandemic restrictions. Alcohol-related items asked about changes to overall consumption (analysed as increased vs. decreased/same) and number of standard drinks per occasion (analysed as <5 drinks [not hazardous consumption] vs. 5+ drinks [hazardous]). Two hierarchical binary logistic regressions were conducted to explore predictors of increased and hazardous alcohol intake. Results: Eight percent of men reported increased alcohol intake and nine percent reported hazardous alcohol consumption during COVID-19 restrictions. Being in a younger age group (‘younger old’; OR=0.46, 95%CI=1.03, 2.28), having mild to severe depressive symptoms (OR=1.39, 95%CI=1.10, 5.05), and greater concern about becoming sick with COVID-19 (OR=1.52, 95%CI=1.03, 2.28) were predictive of increased alcohol consumption during restrictions. Younger age group (OR=0.46, 95%CI=0.34, 0.62) and greater concern about becoming sick with COVID-19 (OR=1.67, 95%CI=1.13, 2.51) were also predictive of hazardous alcohol consumption during this time. Discussion: Men participating in longitudinal health study follow-ups may be less inclined to engage in unhelpful coping behaviours such as problematic alcohol use. Clinicians should regularly screen older men for risky alcohol consumption; a particular focus on screening ‘younger old’ men, those with more significant concerns around COVID-19, and those with depression symptoms may be warranted.

While psychotherapeutic e-mental health interventions may circumvent barriers that many men face in accessing mental health care, the effects of men using these interventions have not been evaluated. We aimed to synthesise the characteristics of psychotherapeutic e-mental health interventions for depression or anxiety that have been trialled and evaluated in men, and synthesise and meta-analyse the effects of these interventions on men’s depression and anxiety, including examining influences of participant, intervention, and study characteristics on outcomes. Seven papers (N = 552 participant men) identified from systematic literature searches met inclusion criteria. A total 177 studies were excluded because although they met all other inclusion criteria, they did not present analysable data on participant men. The seven included interventions varied in content, length, and format; only one intervention was gender sensitive, having been designed specifically for men. All three randomised controlled trials detected no post-trial difference in men’s depression symptoms between intervention and control participants. All four treatment studies presenting pre-post data reported post-intervention improvements in depression or social anxiety symptoms; this was supported by our meta-analysis of two studies, which found a medium-sized, positive effect of depression treatment interventions on depression symptoms in pre-post data (g = 0.64, p < 0.005). Further meta-analyses could not be conducted due to data limitations. Psychotherapeutic e-mental health treatment interventions result in pre- to post-intervention improvements in men’s depression symptoms. There is urgent need for consideration of gender and sex in the development, evaluation, and dissemination of e-mental health interventions for men, and for further information on their effects.