Introduction: COVID-19 restrictions introduced several changes in university academic and social experience. Self-isolation and online teaching have amplified students’ mental health vulnerability. Thus, we aimed to explore feelings and perspectives about the impact of the pandemic on mental health, comparing students from Italy and the UK. Methods: Data were collected from the qualitative portion of “the CAMPUS study”, longitudinally assessing mental health of students at the University of Milano-Bicocca (Italy) and the University of Surrey (UK). We conducted in-depth interviews and thematically analysed the transcripts. Results: The explanatory model was developed from four themes identified across 33 interviews: anxiety exacerbated by COVID-19; putative mechanisms leading to poor mental health; the most vulnerable subgroups; and coping strategies. Generalised and social anxiety resulted from COVID-19 restrictions by being associated with loneliness, excessive time online, unhealthy management of time and space and poor communication with the university. Freshers, international students, and people on the extremes of the introversion/extroversion spectrum, were identified as vulnerable, while effective coping strategies included taking advantage of free time, connection with family and mental health support. The impact of COVID-19 was mostly related to academic issues by students from Italy, whereas to the drastic loss of social connectedness by the UK sample. Conclusions: Mental health support for students has an essential role, and measures that encourage communication and social connectedness are likely to be beneficial.

Background: Organisational and individual barriers often prevent university students from seeking mental health support. Digital technologies are recognised as effective in managing psychological distress and as a source of health-related information, thus representing useful options to address mental health needs in terms of accessibility and cost-effectiveness. However, university students' experiences and perspectives towards such interventions are little known. Objectives: We thus aimed to expand the existing base of scientific knowledge, focusing on this special population. Methods: Data were from the qualitative component of “the CAMPUS study”, longitudinally assessing the mental health of students at the University of Milano-Bicocca (Italy) and the University of Surrey (UK). We conducted in-depth interviews and thematically analysed the transcripts using the framework approach. Results: An explanatory model was derived from five themes identified across 33 interviews (15 for Italy, 18 for the UK). Students perceived that social media, apps, and podcasts could deliver relevant mental health content, ranging from primary to tertiary prevention. Wide availability and anonymity were perceived as advantages that make tools suitable for preventive interventions, to reduce mental health stigma, and as an extension of standard treatment. These goals can be hindered by disadvantages, namely lower efficacy compared to face-to-face contact, lack of personalisation, and problematic engagement. Individual and cultural specificities might influence awareness and perspectives on the use of digital technologies for mental health support. Conclusion: Although considering some specific features, digital tools could be a useful instrument to support the mental health needs of students. Since personal contact remains crucial, digital tools should be integrated with face-to-face interventions through a multi-modal approach.