Open Access

ARTICLE

Evaluation of the “Mais Por Ti” Positive Mental Health Promotion Program for Health Care Professionals: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Sérgio Cunha^1,*, Mariana Lima¹, Sónia Rocha², Daniela Machado¹, Liliana Silva³
1 Psychiatry Department, Local Health Unit of Matosinhos, Matosinhos, Portugal
2 Nephrology Department, Local Health Unit of Matosinhos, Matosinhos, Portugal
3 Research Department, Local Health Unit of Matosinhos, Matosinhos, Portugal
* Corresponding Author: Sérgio Cunha. Email:

International Journal of Mental Health Promotion https://doi.org/10.32604/ijmhp.2026.081383

Received 01 March 2026; Accepted 28 May 2026; Published online 17 August 2026

Abstract

Background: Health care professionals are exposed to occupational stressors that increase vulnerability to psychological distress and reduced well-being. Interventions grounded in positive mental health models may strengthen protective psychological resources in workplace settings. Methods: This quasi-experimental, single-group study examined changes associated with participation in the “Mais Por Ti” Positive Mental Health Promotion Program among health care professionals in an urban Portuguese health unit. Participants were assessed at baseline (T1), immediately post-intervention (T2), and six months later (T3) using the Positive Mental Health Questionnaire (PMHQ), the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS), and the Psychological Vulnerability Scale (PVS). Changes over time were examined using paired t-tests, and effect sizes were estimated using Cohen’s d with 95% confidence intervals. Results: At baseline, 236 participants completed the assessment (T2: n = 164; T3: n = 77). Statistically significant changes were observed across all outcomes. Satisfaction with life increased from T1 to T2 (mean difference = +3.02, d = 0.8, 95% CI [2.40, 3.65], p < 0.001) and remained higher at follow-up (+2.82, d = 0.6, 95% CI [1.68, 3.96], p < 0.001). Psychological vulnerability decreased post-intervention (−1.79, d = 0.5, 95% CI [−2.36, −1.23], p < 0.001) and further at T3 (−2.79, d = 0.7, 95% CI [−3.72, −1.86], p < 0.001). PMHQ scores also decreased at T2 (−0.18, d = 0.8, 95% CI [−0.22, −0.15], p < 0.001) and at T3 (−0.24, d = 0.8, 95% CI [−0.31, −0.18], p < 0.001); given the scoring direction of the instrument, lower scores indicate higher positive mental health. Conclusions: Participation in the program was associated with changes over time in positive mental health, life satisfaction, and psychological vulnerability among health care professionals. However, given the single-group design and substantial attrition, these findings should be interpreted with caution. The program may represent a structured workplace-based approach warranting further evaluation in controlled studies.

---

Keywords

Mental health; health personnel; health promotion; occupational health; workplace; psychological well-being; program evaluation

---