Eight Months of Telehealth for a State-Funded Project in Foster Care and Related Services: Progress Made and Lessons Learned

Videoconferencing in mental health services for children and adolescents receiving child welfare services: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Videoconferencing is considered an alternative to face-to-face consultations and a possibility to help overcome access-to-care barriers in mental health care services. Barriers to child and adolescent mental health services are particularly apparent in the case of children and adolescents receiving child welfare services. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of research on videoconferencing in the mental health treatment of children and adolescents receiving support from child welfare services.

METHODS

This scoping review follows the review framework outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The following databases were searched from January 2012 to April 2024: Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL Plus, Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest), Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

The search yielded 4322 unique records and resulted in the inclusion of 22 articles that met the inclusion criteria. The studies originated from Denmark, England, Australia, Norway, Canada, Chile, and the USA, and were grouped into four areas: (1) videoconferencing to increase access to mental health treatment for vulnerable groups (2) young people's perspectives (3) videoconferencing in interdisciplinary collaborative meetings, and (4) use, awareness, and acceptance of videoconferencing among health and social care providers.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review shows that if videoconferencing in mental health care is to become an established and trusted method aimed at children and adolescents receiving child welfare services, several unresolved and potentially negative issues need attention and more research. This particularly applies to whether videoconferencing decreases or exacerbates inequalities in access to mental health services. A further question is whether new barriers are raised by screen-based treatment to threaten good therapeutic relationships, and by extension treatment quality and clinical outcomes.

Implementation Considerations for Family-Based Telehealth Interventions for Youth in Foster Care: Focus Group Study With Child Welfare System Professionals

BACKGROUND

Between 2016 and 2020, over 600,000 youth were served annually by the foster care system. Despite approximately half of foster youth struggling with emotional or behavioral challenges, few receive much-needed services to address their mental health concerns. Family-based interventions are efficacious in addressing both youth and caregiver mental health needs; however, foster youth participation in these family-based interventions is limited by many barriers, including out-of-home placement far from their family of origin. Telehealth is a promising tool for mitigating barriers to access to treatment interventions for foster youth and their families.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand child welfare system professionals' perspectives on enabling factors and barriers to providing family-based interventions via telehealth to youth in out-of-county foster care placement.

METHODS

This qualitative study derived themes from 3 semistructured focus groups with child welfare system professionals. Participants were asked to discuss how family-based interventions are delivered to foster youth and their caregivers in their jurisdictions, as well as to share their thoughts about how to use telehealth to improve access to family-based interventions for families with youth in out-of-home placement. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis and inductive thematic analysis, with the Behavioral Model for Vulnerable Populations as the theoretical framework.

RESULTS

Participants were 19 child welfare system professionals (eg, social workers, residential treatment staff, and supervisors) who participated in 1 of the 3 focus groups (6-7/group). Most participants were women (n=13, 68%), White individuals (n=10, 53%), and social workers (n=8, 42%). On average, participants worked in the child welfare system for 16.6 (SD 8.3) years. Participants identified multilevel factors impacting family-based intervention delivery including environmental factors (eg, Medicare billing and presumptive transfer), predisposing characteristics (eg, psychological resources), enabling factors (eg, transportation and team-based youth-centered care), and need factors (eg, motivation to engage). Participants expressed optimism that telehealth could increase access to needed mental health care, diverse providers, and longevity of care while also expressing some concerns regarding telehealth access and literacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Child welfare system professionals highlight the need to develop policies and telehealth interventions that are youth versus placement centered, include resources that limit barriers and bolster motivation for engagement, and follow a team-based care model. Findings from this study inform how telehealth can be used to increase access to and engagement with family-based interventions for youth in out-of-home placements and their caregivers of origin.

'It's not like real therapy': young people receiving child welfare services' experiences of video consultations in mental healthcare in Norway: a mixed methods approach

BACKGROUND

Video consultations has been suggested to lower the threshold for child and adolescent mental healthcare treatment. This study explores how young people receiving child welfare services experience video consultations in child and adolescent mental healthcare. The study is part of a larger Norwegian study of access to health services for this target group.

METHODS

The study has a mixed methods design including qualitative interviews and a quantitative survey, with young people receiving child welfare services. The qualitative interviews included 10 participants aged 15-19. The survey included 232 participants aged 16-24 of which 36 reported having received video consultations in mental healthcare. The interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. The survey data was presented as frequencies to clarify the distribution of positive and negative perceptions of video consultation.

RESULTS

The results show that the participants experienced video consultations as more superficial and less binding, compared to in-person sessions. They raised concerns of the therapeutic relationship, however some found it easier to regulate closeness and distance. In the survey several reported that their relationship with the therapist got worse, and that it was much more difficult to talk on screen. Moreover, a large proportion (42%) claimed that video consultations did not fit their treatment needs overall. However, a minority of the participants found it easier to talk to the therapist on screen.

CONCLUSIONS

The study reveals important weaknesses and disadvantages of online therapy as experienced by young people receiving child welfare services. It is particularly worrying that their criticism involves the relational aspects of treatment, as children receiving child welfare services often have relational experiences which make them particularly sensitive to challenges in relationships. This study shows that youth involvement in decision making of video consultations in therapy has been rare. Clinicians should be aware of these young people's doubts regarding the quality of video consultations in child and adolescent mental health care. Further studies should examine how user involvement can be incorporated in video consultations in therapy and how this could improve experiences and the quality of video consultations.