Practice-based versus telemedicine-based collaborative care for depression in rural federally qualified health centers: a pragmatic randomized comparative effectiveness trial

Telepsychiatry in post-pandemic India: A mixed methods exploration of patient perspectives and preferences toward telemedicine versus in-person consultations

BACKGROUND

Telepsychiatry saw wide acceptance during the COVID-19 pandemic, when traditional healthcare facilities were inaccessible. Post-pandemic, however, user preferences for the service remain uncertain. This study explores user perceptions of telepsychiatry, particularly focusing on those who discontinued its use, to identify factors influencing service satisfaction and barriers to continued use.

METHODOLOGY

A mixed methods study was conducted on interviews with 165 patients who had utilised telepsychiatry services at a tertiary care teaching hospital in north India. Quantitative data were collected on telepsychiatry dropout rates, and bivariate analyses identified differences between continuing users and discontinuers. Qualitative data were gathered via semi-structured interviews, thematically analysed, and coded to examine personal, illness-related, and socio-environmental determinants of service choice.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed a telepsychiatry dropout rate of 56.4 %, once physical OPDs became operational. Eight major themes - convenience, cost & time, therapeutic relationship, technological difficulty, service limitation, treatment outcome and privacy, affected telepsychiatry usage. Patients valued telepsychiatry for its convenience and time savings, while challenges such as brief consultations, frequent changes in doctors, and lack of privacy at home or work, prevented continued use. Technological barriers, especially for elderly and rural patients, and higher medication costs at local pharmacies were significant deterrents.

CONCLUSION

Telepsychiatry service use is dependent on a dynamic interplay between clinical condition, resource availability with user, service quality and available alternatives. Addressing these challenges remain crucial for integrating telepsychiatry into primary healthcare and ensuring its long-term sustainability.

Effectiveness of a pharmacist-led tele-psychiatric clinic in managing drug-related problems

Background

The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of telepsychiatry combined with the expertise of psychiatric clinical pharmacists in identifying and addressing drug-related problems (DRPs) associated with psychotropic medications. Additionally, the research assessed physicians' acceptance of pharmacists' recommendations for managing these DRPs.

Methods

A cohort retrospective study was conducted at a leading tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia spanning from January 2023 to January 2024 in a psychiatry setting. The study comprehensively examined all instances of interventions for DRPs facilitated through patient-initiated telepsychiatry encounters with psychiatric clinical pharmacists. Detailed and meticulously recorded notes from patient chart reviews, documented by the pharmacist in the Electronic Health Record (EHR), during each encounter, were reviewed. These notes provided significant information on psychiatric diagnosis, identified DRPs and the specific interventions and recommendations proposed by the clinical pharmacist to the attending physician. The Krska classification was utilised to classify and analyse the identified DRPs, ensuring a structured and systematic approach to the study's findings.

Results

A total of 259 pharmacist interventions were made, and the results revealed a remarkably high acceptance rate of 98.5% among physicians. The most common intervention (16.21%) involved targeted education to improve medication adherence. Additionally, substantial efforts were directed towards rectifying inappropriate dosage regimens, accounting for 13.51% of DRPs resolved by the pharmacist. Noteworthy interventions also encompassed the identification and management of potential or suspected adverse reactions, comprising 12.35% of the interventions, along with interventions addressing concerns regarding potentially ineffective therapy, which constituted 11.59%.

Conclusion

The study underscores the critical role of pharmacists in psychiatric care, with high physician acceptance of their interventions. The diverse range of DRPs highlights the need to expand clinical pharmacy services and integrate pharmacists into psychiatric teams. Our findings clearly demonstrate that integrating pharmacists into psychiatric care settings is beneficial. This approach enhances DRP identification and management, ultimately enhancing patient care and treatment outcomes.

Integrating psychiatry and family medicine in the management of somatic symptom disorders: Diagnosis, collaboration, and communication strategies

Somatic symptom disorders (SSDs) present a complex interplay of physical and psychological factors, necessitating an integrative approach to diagnosis and management. This article explores the collaborative efforts between family medicine and psychiatry in addressing SSDs, emphasizing the importance of a multidisciplinary strategy for comprehensive patient care. Effective diagnosis involves recognizing the significance of both somatic symptoms and the patient's psychological response, with tools like structured clinical interviews and self-report questionnaires playing crucial roles. Management strategies include psychotherapeutic interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), pharmacological treatments, and lifestyle modifications, all tailored to the patient's needs. Communication strategies are vital in validating patients' experiences while addressing underlying psychiatric issues. Techniques such as active listening, biopsychosocial framing, and the teach-back method foster trust and improve treatment adherence. Cultural considerations and the use of interpreters enhance communication with diverse patient populations. Training programs for healthcare providers further improve competency in managing SSDs. This integrative approach aims to enhance patient outcomes by addressing the multifaceted nature of SSDs through collaborative care, effective communication, and comprehensive treatment planning.

Impact of Nursing Interventions via Telephone and Email on the Quality of Life of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Preliminary Results of a Comparative Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), encompassing ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, is a heterogeneous chronic condition characterized by periods of relapse and remission. Ulcerative colitis involves inflammation of the colon and rectum mucosa, while Crohn's disease causes deeper, transmural inflammation affecting all four gut layers from the mouth to the anus and can lead to complications such as fistulation. IBD significantly impacts patients' physical and psychological well-being, thus reducing their quality of life (QoL). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of nursing intervention facilitated through telephone and email support in improving the quality of life (QoL) of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients.

METHODS

A pilot comparative observational design with pre-test and post-test assessments was employed, involving 50 participants assigned to either an intervention group (Group A, n = 26) or a control group (Group B, n = 24). Group A received regular telephone consultations and prompt email responses from trained nurses; Group B received standard care. Data were collected at baseline and six months post-intervention (T1) using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.

RESULTS

Group A showed significant improvements in anxiety, depression, fatigue, and sleep quality, with p-values indicating the significance of these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored nursing support via remote communication significantly benefits IBD patients by alleviating psychological distress and enhancing their overall well-being, underscoring the importance of integrating such interventions into standard IBD care practices.

Videocall delivered psychological interventions for treating depressive symptoms in primary care - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Depression is a very common disorder and comorbidity. Primary care providers are the first medical contacts to diagnose and treat depression. Video calls are emerging communication tools to deliver psychological interventions.

AIMS

To examine the effectiveness of videocall delivered psychological interventions to treat depressive symptoms in adult patients in primary care, as well as a systematic assessment of implementation factors.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed Central, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library and the WHO COVID-19 database and included randomized controlled trials only. Two authors screened the studies and assessed the risk of bias independently (Cochrane RoB tool). We followed the PRISMA guidelines. The study protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42022295238). The results were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

Of 6.971 identified studies, we included six publications. Studies powered to detect clinically significant changes in primary outcomes, identified video calls to be effective for delivering complex psychological interventions in an integrated primary care setting.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to consolidate the findings on a larger scale and evaluate the effectiveness in comparison with alternatives such as telephone-delivered care. Results are promising and indicate the need for replication in larger studies as well as different health care settings.

Model of integrated mental health video consultations for people with depression or anxiety in primary care (PROVIDE-C): assessor masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether an integrated mental health video consultation approach (PROVIDE model) can improve symptoms compared with usual care in adults with depression and anxiety disorders attending primary care.

DESIGN

Assessor masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (PROVIDE-C).

SETTING

In 29 primary care practices in Germany, working remotely online from one trial hub.

PARTICIPANTS

376 adults (18-81 years) who presented to their general practitioner (GP) with depression or anxiety, or both.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive the PROVIDE model (n=187) or usual care (n=189). Usual care was provided by GPs through interventions such as brief counselling and psychotropic medication prescriptions and may or may not have included referrals to mental health specialists. The PROVIDE model comprised transdiagnostic treatment provided through five real-time video sessions between the patient at the primary care practice and a mental health specialist at an offsite location.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the absolute change in the mean severity of depressive and anxiety symptoms measured using the patient health questionnaire anxiety and depression scale (PHQ-ADS) at six months, in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary outcomes, measured at six and 12 months, included PHQ-ADS subscores, psychological distress related to somatic symptoms, recovery, health related quality of life, quality and patient centredness of chronic illness care, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Between 24 March 2020 and 23 November 2021, 376 patients were randomised into treatment groups. Mean age was 45 years (standard deviation (SD) 14), 63% of the participants were female, and mean PHQ-ADS-score was 26 points (SD 7.6). Compared with usual care, the PROVIDE intervention led to improvements in severity of depressive and anxiety symptom (adjusted mean change difference in the PHQ-ADS score -2.4 points (95% confidence interval -4.5 to -0.4), P=0.02) at six months. The effects were sustained at 12 months (-2.9 (-5.0 to -0.7), P<0.01). No serious adverse events were reported in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Through relatively low intensity treatment, the PROVIDE model led to a decrease in depressive and anxiety symptoms with small effects in the short and long term. Depression and anxiety disorders are prevalent and therefore the small effect might cumulatively impact on population health in this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04316572.

Telehealth-guided provider-to-provider communication to improve rural health: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth may address healthcare disparities for rural populations. This systematic review assesses the use, effectiveness, and implementation of telehealth-supported provider-to-provider collaboration to improve rural healthcare.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL®, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 1 January 2010 to 12 October 2021 for trials and observational studies of rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Abstracts and full text were dual-reviewed. We assessed the risk of bias for individual studies and strength of evidence for studies with similar outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven studies of rural uptake of provider-to-provider telehealth documented increases over time but variability across geographic regions. In 97 effectiveness studies, outcomes were similar with rural provider-to-provider telehealth versus without for inpatient consultations, neonatal care, outpatient depression and diabetes, and emergency care. Better or similar results were reported for changes in rural clinician behavior, knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy. Evidence was insufficient for other clinical uses and outcomes. Sixty-seven (67) evaluation and qualitative studies identified barriers and facilitators to implementing rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Success was linked to well-functioning technology, sufficient resources, and adequate payment. Barriers included lack of understanding of rural context and resources. Methodologic weaknesses of studies included less rigorous study designs and small samples.

DISCUSSION

Rural provider-to-provider telehealth produces similar or better results versus care without telehealth. Barriers to rural provider-to-provider telehealth implementation are common to practice change but include some specific to rural adaptation and adoption. Evidence gaps are partially due to studies that do not address differences in the groups compared or do not include sufficient sample sizes.

Primary Care Models and Depression Outcomes in Rural Adult Populations: A Systematic Review

Rural populations rely on primary care services for depression care due to shortages and maldistributions of specialty mental health care favoring urban areas. Yet, it is unknown which primary care models are effective at reducing depressive symptoms and emergency department (ED) use for depression among rural populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the effectiveness of primary care models on depressive symptoms and ED utilization for depression in rural populations. PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and reference lists of included studies were searched. Eligible articles focused on the impact of primary care models on depressive symptoms or ED utilization for depression among rural populations in the United States. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Three care models were identified in the studies, including collaborative care (i.e., team-based integrated care that tracks patient populations with a registry; n = 7), tele-psychotherapy (i.e., identification of patients in primary care and referral to virtual psychotherapy; n = 6), or self-management support (i.e., identification of patients in primary care and referral to community support for depression self-management; n = 4). These care models were associated with improved patient-reported depressive symptoms such as Patient-Health Questionnaire reported remission of depression (score < 5). No studies assessed depression ED utilization as an outcome. Collaborative care, tele-psychotherapy, and self-management support may be effective at reducing depressive symptoms, specifically in rural populations and should be implemented at the practice level. Research focused on primary care models and ED utilization for depression among rural populations is needed.

Live two-way video versus face-to-face treatment for depression, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorder: A 24-week randomized controlled trial

AIM

Live two-way video, easily accessible from home via smartphones and other devices, is becoming a new way of providing psychiatric treatment. However, lack of evidence for real-world clinical setting effectiveness hampers its approval by medical insurance in some countries. Here, we conducted the first large-scale pragmatic, randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of long-term treatment for multiple psychiatric disorders via two-way video using smartphones and other devices, which are currently the primary means of telecommunication.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial compared two-way video versus face-to-face treatment for depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder in the subacute/maintenance phase during a 24-week period. Adult patients with the above-mentioned disorders were allocated to either a two-way video group (≥50% video sessions) or a face-to-face group (100% in-person sessions) and received standard treatment covered by public medical insurance. The primary outcome was the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Mental Component Summary (SF-36 MCS) score. Secondary outcomes included all-cause discontinuation, working alliance, adverse events, and the severity rating scales for each disorder.

RESULTS

A total of 199 patients participated in this study. After 24 weeks of treatment, two-way video treatment was found to be noninferior to face-to-face treatment regarding SF-36 MCS score (48.50 vs 46.68, respectively; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding most secondary end points, including all-cause discontinuation, treatment efficacy, and satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Two-way video treatment using smartphones and other devices, was noninferior to face-to-face treatment in real-world clinical settings. Modern telemedicine, easily accessible from home, can be used as a form of health care.

Telemedicine Implementation for Safety Net Populations: A Systematic Review

Background: Telemedicine systems were rapidly implemented in response to COVID-19. However, little is known about their effectiveness, acceptability, and sustainability for safety net populations. This study systematically reviewed primary care telemedicine implementation and effectiveness in safety net settings. Methods: We searched PubMed for peer-reviewed articles on telemedicine implementation from 2013 to 2021. The search was done between June and December 2021. Included articles focused on health care organizations that primarily serve low-income and/or rural populations in the United States. We screened 244 articles from an initial search of 343 articles and extracted and analyzed data from N = 45 articles. Results: Nine (20%) of 45 articles were randomized controlled trials. N = 22 reported findings for at least one marginalized group (i.e., racial/ethnic minority, 65 years+, limited English proficiency). Only n = 19 (42%) included African American/Black patients in demographics descriptions, n = 14 (31%) LatinX/Hispanic patients, n = 4 (9%) Asian patients, n = 4 (9%) patients aged 65+ years, and n = 4 (9%) patients with limited English proficiency. Results show telemedicine can provide high-quality primary care that is more accessible and affordable. Fifteen studies assessed barriers and facilitators to telemedicine implementation. Common barriers were billing/administrative workflow disruption (n = 9, 20%), broadband access/quality (n = 5, 11%), and patient preference for in-person care (n = 4, 9%). Facilitators included efficiency gains (n = 6, 13%), patient acceptance (n = 3, 7%), and enhanced access (n = 3, 7%). Conclusions: Telemedicine is an acceptable care modality to deliver primary care in safety net settings. Future studies should compare telemedicine and in-person care quality and test strategies to improve telemedicine implementation in safety net settings.

Systematic literature review of the impact of psychiatric pharmacists

Introduction

Pharmacists focusing on psychotropic medication management and practicing across a wide variety of healthcare settings have significantly improved patient-level outcomes. The Systematic Literature Review Committee of the American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists was tasked with compiling a comprehensive database of primary literature highlighting the impact of psychiatric pharmacists on patient-level outcomes.

Methods

A systematic search of literature published from January 1, 1961, to December 31, 2022, was conducted using PubMed and search terms based on a prior American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists literature review. Publications describing patient-level outcome results associated with pharmacist provision of care in psychiatric/neurologic settings and/or in relation to psychotropic medications were included. The search excluded articles for which there was no pharmacist intervention, no psychiatric disorder treatment, no clinical outcomes, no original research, no access to full text, and/or no English-language version.

Results

A total of 4270 articles were reviewed via PubMed, with 4072 articles excluded based on title, abstract, and/or full text in the initial pass and 208 articles selected for inclusion. A secondary full-text review excluded 11 additional articles, and 5 excluded articles were ultimately included based on a secondary review, for a final total of 202 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. A comprehensive database of these articles was compiled, including details on their study designs and outcomes.

Discussion

The articles included in the final database had a wide range of heterogeneity. While the overall impact of psychiatric pharmacists was positive, the study variability highlights the need for future publications to have more consistent, standardized outcomes with stronger study designs.

The effectiveness of telehealth versus face-to face interventions for anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, it is estimated that 264 million people meet the diagnostic criteria for anxiety conditions. Effective treatment regimens consist of cognitive and behavioural therapies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, treatment delivery relied heavily on telemedicine technologies which enabled remote consultation with patients via phone or video platforms. We aim to identify, appraise and synthesise randomised controlled trials comparing telehealth to face-to-face delivery of care to individuals of any age or gender, diagnosed with anxiety disorders, and disorders with anxiety features.

METHODS

To conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched three electronic databases, clinical trial registries and citing-cited references of included studies.

RESULTS

A total of five small randomised controlled trials were includable; telehealth was conducted by video in three studies, and by telephone in two. The risk of bias for the 5 studies was low to moderate for most domains. Outcomes related to anxiety, depression symptom severity, obsessive-compulsive disorder, function, working alliance, and satisfaction were comparable between the two modes of delivery at each follow-up time point (immediately post-intervention, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months), with no significant differences reported (p > 0.05). None of the trials reported on the costs of telehealth compared to face-to-face care.

DISCUSSION

For effectively treating anxiety and related conditions, interventions delivered by telehealth appear to be as effective as the same therapy delivered in-person. However, further high-quality trials are warranted to determine the effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of telehealth interventions for the management of a wider range of anxiety disorders and treatments.

Primary care provider perspectives on virtual and in-person depression management during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care providers (PCPs), nurses, and integrated mental health specialists continued to collaboratively manage depression among patients using both in-person and virtual (i.e., hybrid) modalities. Few studies have characterized how hybrid services are currently delivered within interdisciplinary primary care teams. This study aimed to understand frontline PCPs' perspectives on providing hybrid virtual and in-person depression care during the pandemic.

METHOD

From September to November 2020, 12 semistructured individual interviews focused on depression management were conducted with PCPs in two Veterans Health Administration (VA) clinics in Los Angeles, which resumed in-person services while balancing rising COVID-19 cases. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for depression management patterns. Themes were derived using a team-based constant comparative analytic approach.

RESULTS

The pandemic and subsequent expanded use of virtual care necessitated clinic adaptations to depression assessments and procedures. PCPs perceived increased depression and anxiety among patients with existing psychiatric conditions, attributed to social distancing and isolation restrictions. They expressed acceptance of virtual care modalities for patients' depression management. PCPs did not perceive a delay in mental health care delivery in the shift to virtual care but noted the possibility of patients being lost to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

During the pandemic, there has been heightened PCP concern for patients' emotional well-being and adaptations of clinic processes to meet needs for depression care. While PCPs were optimistic about new virtual care options for depression management, virtual care transfers remained poorly defined and the extent to which patient care experiences and health outcomes have been disrupted remains unknown. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

A Positive Distress Screen…Now What? An Updated Call for Integrated Psychosocial Care

How can we move collaborative care from evidence-based practice to everyday practice for those living with cancer and distress?

Use of Telemedicine and Quality of Care Among Medicare Enrollees With Serious Mental Illness

Importance

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a large fraction of mental health care was provided via telemedicine. The implications of this shift in care for use of mental health service and quality of care have not been characterized.

Objective

To compare changes in care patterns and quality during the first year of the pandemic among Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness (schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder) cared for at practices with higher vs lower telemedicine use.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study, Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder were attributed to specialty mental health practices that delivered the majority of their mental health care in 2019. Practices were categorized into 3 groups based on the proportion of telemental health visits provided during the first year of the pandemic (March 2020-February 2021): lowest use (0%-49%), middle use (50%-89%), or highest use (90%-100%). Across the 3 groups of practices, differential changes in patient outcomes were calculated from the year before the pandemic started to the year after. These changes were also compared with differential changes from a 2-year prepandemic period. Analyses were conducted in November 2022.

Exposure

Practice-level use of telemedicine during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the total number of mental health visits (telemedicine plus in-person) per person. Secondary outcomes included the number of acute hospital and emergency department encounters, all-cause mortality, and quality outcomes, including adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications (as measured by the number of months of medication fills) and 7- and 30-day outpatient follow-up rates after discharge for a mental health hospitalization.

Results

The pandemic cohort included 120 050 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [14.5] years; 66 638 females [55.5%]) with serious mental illness. Compared with prepandemic changes and relative to patients receiving care at practices with the lowest telemedicine use: patients receiving care at practices in the middle and highest telemedicine use groups had 1.11 (95% CI, 0.45-1.76) and 1.94 (95% CI, 1.28-2.59) more mental health visits per patient per year (or 7.5% [95% CI, 3.0%-11.9%] and 13.0% [95% CI, 8.6%-17.4%] more mental health visits per year, respectively). Among patients of practices with middle and highest telemedicine use, changes in adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications were -0.4% (95% CI, -1.3% to 0.5%) and -0.1% (95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%), and hospital and emergency department use for any reason changed by 2.4% (95% CI, -1.5% to 6.2%) and 2.8% (95% CI, -1.2% to 6.8%), respectively. There were no significant differential changes in postdischarge follow-up or mortality rates according to the level of telemedicine use.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness, patients receiving care from practices that had a higher level of telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic had more mental health visits per year compared with prepandemic levels, with no differential changes in other observed quality metrics over the same period.

Community-guided measurement-based care for autistic youth and adults receiving psychotherapy: A conceptual overview and pilot implementation study of MBC-AUT

LAY ABSTRACT

Autistic youth and adults are more likely to experience psychiatric symptoms (e.g. depression, anxiety) and to use psychiatric services than non-autistic people, yet research on evidence-based approaches to enhance psychiatric care for autistic people is limited. Measurement-based care is an evidence-based approach to psychotherapy that improves outcomes for clients, clinicians, and organizations by routinely administering and evaluating measures to clients. Despite this, research on measurement-based care systems for autistic clients is sparse. To address this gap, we developed an autism-adapted measurement-based care (MBC-AUT) system for and with autistic people and pilot tested the system in an outpatient psychiatry clinic to investigate the preliminary feasibility, acceptability, benefits, and barriers to this system for clients and clinicians. Findings suggested that the MBC-AUT system was a feasible and acceptable system for the first 18 autistic youth, their caregivers, and autistic adults to use the system. In semi-structured interviews, clients and clinicians discussed the benefits of the MBC-AUT system to various therapeutic processes, as well as several important barriers to the use of the system. We offer potential solutions to address these barriers and to reduce client and clinician burden, and propose future directions for this line of research to increase access to more autistic people. As autistic clients continue to seek psychological services amid social landscapes of increasing complexity (e.g. COVID-19 pandemic), efforts to enhance the delivery of psychotherapy for this population are critical.

Telepsychiatry: what clinicians need to know about digital mental healthcare

The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly accelerated the use of online and remote mental healthcare provision. The immediate need to transform services has not allowed for thorough examination of the literature supporting remote delivery of psychiatric care. In this article we review the history of telepsychiatry, the rationale for continuing to offer services remotely and the limitations of psychiatry without in-person care. Focusing on randomised controlled trials we find that evidence for the efficacy of remotely delivered psychiatric care compared with in-person treatment is of low quality and limited scope but does not demonstrate clear superiority of one care delivery method over the other.

Effectiveness of Collaborative Care and Colocated Specialty Care for Bipolar Disorder in Primary Care: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Individuals with bipolar disorder commonly present for treatment in primary care settings. Collaborative care and colocated specialty care models can improve quality of care and outcomes, though it is unknown which model is more effective.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 12-month treatment outcomes for primary care patients with bipolar disorder randomized to treatment with collaborative care or colocated specialty care.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of 191 patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder treated for 12 months during a comparative effectiveness trial in 12 Federally Qualified Health Centers in three states. Characteristics and outcomes were assessed at enrollment and 12 months. The primary outcome was mental health quality of life scores (Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Mental Health Component Summary), and secondary outcomes included depression and anxiety symptom scores, euthymic mood state, and recovery. T-tests and multiple linear and logistic regression models were used.

RESULTS

Among participants (mean age: 40 years; 73% women), the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Mental Health Component Summary increased in both arms over 12 months (baseline: collaborative care 21.99, SD 10.78; colocated specialty 24.15, SD 12.05; 12-month collaborative care 30.63, SD 13.33; colocated specialty 34.16, SD 12.65). The mean Mental Health Component Summary change did not differ by arm (collaborative care: MΔ = 9.09; colocated specialty: MΔ = 10.73; t = -0.67, P = 0.50). Secondary outcomes also improved at 12 months compared to baseline measured by the Hopkins Symptoms Checklist (MΔ = -0.75; SD = 0.85), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (MΔ = -3.92; SD = 6.48), and Recovery Assessment Scale (MΔ = 0.37; SD = 0.65) and did not differ significantly by arm. The proportion of participants with euthymic mood state increased from 11% to 25% with no statistically significant difference by arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of collaborative care and that of colocated specialty care were similar. Both were associated with substantial improvements in mental health quality of life and symptom reduction.

A Telehealth and Telepsychiatry Economic Cost Analysis Framework: Scoping Review

Introduction: Despite a good evidence base for telepsychiatry (TP), economic cost analyses are infrequent and vary in quality. Methods: A scoping review was conducted based on the research question, "From the perspective of an economic cost analysis for telehealth and telepsychiatry, what are the most meaningful ways to ensure a study/intervention improved clinical care, provided value to participants, had population level impact, and is sustainable?" The search in seven databases focused on keywords in four concept areas: (1) economic cost analysis, (2) evaluation, (3) telehealth and telepsychiatry, and (4) quantifiable health status outcomes. The authors reviewed the full-text articles based on the inclusion (Medical Subject Headings [MeSH] of the keywords) and exclusion criteria. Results: Of a total of 2,585 potential references, a total of 99 articles met the inclusion criteria. The evaluation of telehealth and TP has focused on access, quality, patient outcomes, feasibility, effectiveness, outcomes, and cost. Cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, and other analytic models are more common with telehealth than TP studies, and these studies show favorable clinical, quality of life, and economic impact. A standard framework for economic cost analysis should include: an economist for planning, implementation, and evaluation; a tool kit or guideline; comprehensive analysis (e.g., cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; measures for health, quality of life, and utility outcomes for populations; methods to convert outcomes into economic benefits (e.g., monetary, quality of adjusted life year); broad perspective (e.g., societal perspective); sensitivity analysis for uncertainty in modeling; and adjustments for differential timing (e.g., discounting and future costs). Conclusions: Technology assessment and economic cost analysis-such as effectiveness and implementation science approaches-contribute to clinical, training, research, and other organizational missions. More research is needed with a framework that enables comparisons across studies and meta-analyses.

Nurse-led task-shifting strategies to substitute for mental health specialists in primary care: A systematic review

AIM

The study aimed to synthesize evidence comparing task-shifting interventions led by general practice nurses and mental health specialists in improving mental health outcomes of adults in primary care.

DESIGN

This study used a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Articles from the databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane EBM Reviews, Web of Science Core Collection, and ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis published between 2000 and 2020 were included.

REVIEW METHODS

The review was arranged based on the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

RESULTS

Twelve articles met the eligibility criteria. Eight studies revealed that nurse-led intervention was significantly superior to its comparator. The review identified three major themes: training and supervision, single and collaborative care and psychosocial treatments.

CONCLUSION

Nurses could be temporarily employed to provide mental health services in the absence of mental health specialists as long as appropriate training and supervision was provided. This finding should be interpreted with caution due to the high risk of bias in the studies reviewed and the limited generalisability of their findings.

Elements of Integrated Behavioral Health Associated with Primary Care Provider Confidence in Managing Depression at Community Health Centers

BACKGROUND

Depression is most often treated by primary care providers (PCPs), but low self-efficacy in caring for depression may impede adequate management. We aimed to identify which elements of integrated behavioral health (BH) were associated with greater confidence among PCPs in identifying and managing depression.

DESIGN

Mailed cross-sectional surveys in 2016.

PARTICIPANTS

BH leaders and PCPs caring for adult patients at community health centers (CHCs) in 10 midwestern states.

MAIN MEASURES

Survey items asked about depression screening, systems to support care, availability and integration of BH, and PCP attitudes and experiences. PCPs rated their confidence in diagnosing, assessing severity, providing counseling, and prescribing medication for depression on a 5-point scale. An overall confidence score was calculated (range 4 (low) to 20 (high)). Multilevel linear mixed models were used to identify factors associated with confidence.

KEY RESULTS

Response rates were 60% (N=77/128) and 52% (N=538/1039) for BH leaders and PCPs, respectively. Mean overall confidence score was 15.25±2.36. Confidence was higher among PCPs who were satisfied with the accuracy of depression screening (0.38, p=0.01), worked at CHCs with depression tracking systems (0.48, p=0.045), had access to patients' BH treatment plans (1.59, p=0.002), and cared for more patients with depression (0.29, p=0.003). PCPs who reported their CHC had a sufficient number of psychiatrists were more confident diagnosing depression (0.20, p=0.02) and assessing severity (0.24, p=0.03). Confidence in prescribing was lower at CHCs with more patients living below poverty (-0.66, p<0.001). Confidence in diagnosing was lower at CHCs with more Black/African American patients (-0.20, p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs who had access to BH treatment plans, a system for tracking patients with depression, screening protocols, and a sufficient number of psychiatrists were more confident identifying and managing depression. Efforts are needed to address disparities and support PCPs caring for vulnerable patients with depression.

Comparison of Quality Performance Measures for Patients Receiving In-Person vs Telemedicine Primary Care in a Large Integrated Health System

IMPORTANCE

Despite its rapid adoption during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is unknown how telemedicine augmentation of in-person office visits has affected quality of patient care.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether quality of care among patients exposed to telemedicine differs from patients with only in-person office-based care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this retrospective cohort study, standardized quality measures were compared between patients with office-only (in-person) visits vs telemedicine visits from March 1, 2020, to November 30, 2021, across more than 200 outpatient care sites in Pennsylvania and Maryland.

EXPOSURES

Patients completing telemedicine (video) visits.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

χ2 tests determined statistically significant differences in Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality performance measures between office-only and telemedicine-exposed groups. Multivariable logistic regression controlled for sociodemographic factors and comorbidities.

RESULTS

The study included 526 874 patients (409 732 office-only; 117 142 telemedicine exposed) with a comparable distribution of sex (196 285 [49.7%] and 74 878 [63.9%] women), predominance of non-Hispanic (348 127 [85.0%] and 105 408 [90.0%]) and White individuals (334 215 [81.6%] and 100 586 [85.9%]), aged 18 to 65 years (239 938 [58.6%] and 91 100 [77.8%]), with low overall health risk scores (373 176 [91.1%] and 100 076 [85.4%]) and commercial (227 259 [55.5%] and 81 552 [69.6%]) or Medicare or Medicaid (176 671 [43.1%] and 52 513 [44.8%]) insurance. For medication-based measures, patients with office-only visits had better performance, but only 3 of 5 measures had significant differences: patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) receiving antiplatelets (absolute percentage difference [APD], 6.71%; 95% CI, 5.45%-7.98%; P < .001), patients with CVD receiving statins (APD, 1.79%; 95% CI, 0.88%-2.71%; P = .001), and avoiding antibiotics for patients with upper respiratory infections (APD, 2.05%; 95% CI, 1.17%-2.96%; P < .001); there were insignificant differences for patients with heart failure receiving β-blockers and those with diabetes receiving statins. For all 4 testing-based measures, patients with telemedicine exposure had significantly better performance differences: patients with CVD with lipid panels (APD, 7.04%; 95% CI, 5.95%-8.10%; P < .001), patients with diabetes with hemoglobin A1c testing (APD, 5.14%; 95% CI, 4.25%-6.01%; P < .001), patients with diabetes with nephropathy testing (APD, 9.28%; 95% CI, 8.22%-10.32%; P < .001), and blood pressure control (APD, 3.55%; 95% CI, 3.25%-3.85%; P < .001); this was also true for all 7 counseling-based measures: cervical cancer screening (APD, 12.33%; 95% CI, 11.80%-12.85%; P < .001), breast cancer screening (APD, 16.90%; 95% CI, 16.07%-17.71%; P < .001), colon cancer screening (APD, 8.20%; 95% CI, 7.65%-8.75%; P < .001), tobacco counseling and intervention (APD, 12.67%; 95% CI, 11.84%-13.50%; P < .001), influenza vaccination (APD, 9.76%; 95% CI, 9.47%-10.05%; P < .001), pneumococcal vaccination (APD, 5.41%; 95% CI, 4.85%-6.00%; P < .001), and depression screening (APD, 4.85%; 95% CI, 4.66%-5.04%; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of patients with telemedicine exposure, there was a largely favorable association with quality of primary care. This supports telemedicine's value potential for augmenting care capacity, especially in chronic disease management and preventive care. This study also identifies a need for understanding relationships between the optimal blend of telemedicine and in-office care.

Association of statewide stay-at-home orders with utilization of case management and supportive services for veterans experiencing housing insecurity

The US Department of Housing and Urban Development-Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program provides Veterans with a subsidy for rent and case management. In response to the Coronavirus 2019 pandemic, many states enacted stay-at-home orders that may have limited access to case managers. Therefore, we examined the association between statewide stay-at-home orders and utilization of HUD-VASH case management. We linked data on whether a state implemented a statewide stay-at-home order between March 1, 2020 and April 30, 2020 with VA medical records. Analysis time was centered on the date of a state's stay-at-home order (exposed states). For Veterans in states without a stay-at home-order (unexposed states), we used the average date exposed states implemented an order (March 27, 2020). We used a difference-in-difference design and adjusted linear regression models to compare total, in-person, telephone, and video case management encounters per Veteran in the 60 days after a stay-at-home order relative to the prior year. There was no significant difference in utilization of case management between Veterans who lived in states that did and did not issue a stay-at-home order. Across all states and in the 60 days after the index date relative to the prior year, Veterans had more total, telephone and video, and fewer in-person encounters. Statewide stay-at-home orders did not differentially affect utilization of case management. Virtual case management in HUD-VASH can increase program reach; however, the effect of virtual case management on outcomes such as quality of life and Veteran satisfaction is unknown.

Use of Direct-to-Consumer Telemedicine to Access Mental Health Services

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has contributed to growing demand for mental health services, but patients face significant barriers to accessing care. Direct-to-consumer(DTC) telemedicine has been proposed as one way to increase access, yet little is known about its pre-pandemic use for mental healthcare.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize patients, providers, and their use of a large nationwide DTC telemedicine platform for mental healthcare.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Mental health encounters conducted on the American Well DTC telemedicine platform from 2016 to 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients and physicians.

MAIN MEASURES

Patient measures included demographics, insurance report, and number of visits. Provider characteristics included specialty, region, and number of encounters. Encounter measures included wait time, visit length and timing, out-of-pocket payment, coupon use, prescription outcome, referral receipt, where care otherwise would have been sought, and patient satisfaction. Factors associated with five-star physician ratings and prescription receipt were assessed using logistic regression.

KEY RESULTS

We analyzed 19,270 mental health encounters between 6708 patients and 1045 providers. Visits were most frequently for anxiety (39.1%) or depression (32.5%), with high satisfaction (4.9/5) across conditions. Patients had a median 2.0 visits for psychiatry (IQR 1.0-3.0) and therapy (IQR 1.0-5.0), compared to 1.0 visit (IQR 1.0-1.0) for urgent care. High satisfaction was positively correlated with prescription receipt (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.54-2.32) and after-hours timing (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.36). Prescription rates ranged from 79.6% for depression to 32.2% for substance use disorders. Prescription receipt was associated with increased visit frequency (aOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.57-2.42 for ≥ 3 visits).

CONCLUSIONS

As the burden of psychiatric disease grows, DTC telemedicine offers one solution for extending access to mental healthcare. While most encounters were one-off, evidence of some continuity in psychiatry and therapy visits-as well as overall high patient satisfaction-suggests potential for broader DTC telemental health use.

Determinants of Telehealth Service Use among Mental Health Patients: A Case of Rural Louisiana

The COVID-19 pandemic decreased the in-person outpatient visits and accelerated the use of telehealth services among mental health patients. Our study investigated the sociodemographic and clinical correlates of the intensity of telehealth use among mental health patients residing in rural Louisiana, United States. The study sample included 7069 telehealth visits by 1115 unique patients encountered from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021 at six mental health outpatient clinics managed by the Northeast Delta Human Services Authority (NEDHSA). We performed a negative binomial regression analysis with the intensity of service use as the outcome variable. Being younger, female, and more educated were associated with a higher number of telehealth visits. The prevalence of other chronic conditions increased telehealth visits by 10%. The telehealth service intensity varied across the nature of mental health diagnoses, with patients diagnosed with the schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders utilizing 15% fewer telehealth visits than patients diagnosed with depressive disorders. The promotion of telehealth services among mental health patients in the rural setting might require the elimination of the digital divide with a particular focus on the elderly, less educated, and those with serious mental health illnesses such as schizophrenia and psychotic disorders.

Mental Health and Psychotropic Stigma Among Student Pharmacists

Objective

To gain a better understanding of student pharmacists' stigma toward mental health and psychotropic medications.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted via paper and online surveys amongst all student pharmacists enrolled in a Doctor of Pharmacy program in the Southeastern United States (n = 501). The Perceived Devaluation and Discrimination (PDD) Scale was used to measure mental health stigma. The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) was modified to measure psychotropic stigma. MANOVAs were conducted to investigate relationships between student pharmacists' characteristics with mental health and psychotropic stigma. A paired t-test was used to determine if there was a difference between degree of mental health stigma and psychotropic stigma.

Results

A total of 390 participants completed the survey (65%). The sample was mostly female (67%), white (79%), and non-Hispanic (96%). Ages were predominantly within the 19–24-year range (80%), and the majority of respondents reported previous interactions with patients who have mental health conditions (55%) or patients on psychotropic medications (65%). Student personal preferences for mental health treatment were primarily psychologic (42%) or both psychologic and psychotropic (40%). Degree of psychotropic stigma was significantly greater than that of mental health stigma. A statistically significant association was found between student personal preference for treatment and the psychotropic stigma. No difference was found in degree of either type of stigma across cohorts.

Conclusions

Student pharmacists demonstrated both mental health and psychotropic stigmas. Future research should be performed to determine what effects these stigmas have on care of patients with mental health conditions.

Economic costs of implementing evidence-based telemedicine outreach for posttraumatic stress disorder in VA

Background

Telemedicine outreach for posttraumatic stress disorder (TOP) is a virtual evidence-based practice (EBP) involving telephone care management and telepsychology that engages rural patients in trauma-focused psychotherapy. This evaluation examined implementation and intervention costs attributable to deploying TOP from a health system perspective.

Methods

Costs were ascertained as part of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial at five sites within the Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System. All sites initially received a standard implementation strategy, which included internal facilitation, dissemination of an internal facilitators operational guide, funded care manager, care managing training, and technical support. A subset of clinics that failed to meet performance metrics were subsequently randomized to enhanced implementation, which added external facilitation that focused on incorporating TOP clinical processes into existing clinic workflow. We measured site-level implementation activities using project records and structured activity logs tracking personnel-level time devoted to all implementation activities. We monetized time devoted to implementation activities by applying an opportunity cost approach. Intervention costs were measured as accounting-based costs for telepsychiatry/telepsychology and care manager visits, ascertained using VA administrative data. We conducted descriptive analyses of strategy-specific implementation costs across five sites. Descriptive analyses were conducted instead of population-level cost-effectiveness analysis because previous research found enhanced implementation was not more successful than the standard implementation in improving uptake of TOP.

Results

Over the 40-month study period, four of five sites received enhanced implementation. Mean site-level implementation cost per month was $919 (SD = $238) during standard implementation and increased to $1,651 (SD = $460) during enhanced implementation. Mean site-level intervention cost per patient-month was $46 (SD = $28) during standard implementation and $31 (SD = $21) during enhanced implementation.

Conclusions

Project findings inform the expected cost of implementing TOP, which represents one factor health systems should consider in the decision to broadly adopt this EBP. Plain Language Summary: What is already known about the topic: Trauma-focused psychotherapy delivered through telemedicine has been demonstrated as an effective approach for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, uptake of this evidence-based approach by integrated health systems such as the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System is low. What does this paper add: This paper presents new findings on the costs of two implementation approaches designed to increase adoption telemedicine outreach for PTSD from a health system perspective. What are the implications for practice, research, and policy: Cost estimates from this paper can be used by health systems to inform the relative value of candidate implementation strategies to increase adoption of evidence-based treatments for PTSD or other mental health conditions.

Factors Associated With Use of Telemedicine for Follow-Up of SLE in the COVID-19 Outbreak

Objective: To investigate the factors associated with telemedicine (TM) use for follow-up of Systemic Lupus Erythematous (SLE) patients in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: This was a single-centered cross-sectional study conducted in Hong Kong. Consecutive patients followed up at the lupus nephritis clinic were contacted for their preference in changing the coming consultation to TM in the form of videoconferencing. The demographic, socioeconomic, and disease data of the first 140 patients opted for TM and 140 control patients preferred to continue standard in-person follow-up were compared.

Results: The mean age of all the participants was 45.6 ± 11.8 years, and the disease duration was 15.0 ± 9.2 years. The majority of them were on prednisolone (90.0%) and immunosuppressants (67.1%). The mean SLEDAI-2k was 3.4 ± 2.4, physician global assessment (PGA) was 0.46 ± 0.62 and Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) damage index was 0.97 ± 1.23. A significant proportion of the patients (72.1%) had 1 or more comorbidities. It was found that patients with higher mean PGA (TM: 0.54 ± 0.63 vs. control: 0.38 ± 0.59, p = 0.025) and family monthly income > USD 3,800 (TM: 36.4% vs. control: 23.6%; p = 0.028) preferred TM, while full-time employees (TM: 40.0% vs. control: 50.7%; p = 0.041) preferred in-person follow-up. These predictors remained significant in the multivariate analysis after adjusting for age and gender. No other clinical factors were found to be associated with the preference of TM follow-up.

Conclusion: When choosing the mode of care delivery between TM and physical clinic visit for patients with SLE, the physician-assessed disease activity and patient's socio-economic status appeared to be important.

Comparison of Teleintegrated Care and Telereferral Care for Treating Complex Psychiatric Disorders in Primary Care: A Pragmatic Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial

Importance

Only one-third of patients with complex psychiatric disorders engage in specialty mental health care, and only one-tenth receive adequate treatment in primary care. Scalable approaches are critically needed to improve access to effective mental health treatments in underserved primary care settings.

Objective

To compare 2 clinic-to-clinic interactive video approaches to delivering evidence-based mental health treatments to patients in primary care clinics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial used a sequential, multiple-assignment, randomized trial (SMART) design with patient-level randomization. Adult patients treated at 24 primary care clinics without on-site psychiatrists or psychologists from 12 federally qualified health centers in 3 states who screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder and/or bipolar disorder and who were not already receiving pharmacotherapy from a mental health specialist were recruited from November 16, 2016, to June 30, 2019, and observed for 12 months.

Interventions

Two approaches were compared: (1) telepsychiatry/telepsychology-enhanced referral (TER), where telepsychiatrists and telepsychologists assumed responsibility for treatment, and (2) telepsychiatry collaborative care (TCC), where telepsychiatrists provided consultation to the primary care team. TER included an adaptive intervention (phone-enhanced referral [PER]) for patients not engaging in treatment, which involved telephone outreach and motivational interviewing.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Survey questions assessed patient-reported outcomes. The Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey Mental Component Summary (MCS) score was the primary outcome (range, 0-100). Secondary outcomes included posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, manic symptoms, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, recovery, and adverse effects.

Results

Of 1004 included participants, 701 of 1000 (70.1%) were female, 660 of 994 (66.4%) were White, and the mean (SD) age was 39.4 (12.9) years. Baseline MCS scores were 2 SDs below the US mean; the mean (SD) MCS scores were 39.7 (14.1) and 41.2 (14.2) in the TCC and TER groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in 12-month MCS score between those receiving TCC and TER (β = 1.0; 95% CI, -0.8 to 2.8; P = .28). Patients in both groups experienced large and clinically meaningful improvements from baseline to 12 months (TCC: Cohen d = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95; TER: Cohen d = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.04). For patients not engaging in TER at 6 months, there was no significant difference in 12-month MCS score between those receiving PER and TER (β = 2.0; 95% CI, -1.7 to 5.7; P = .29).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this comparative effectiveness trial of patients with complex psychiatric disorders randomized to receive TCC or TER, significantly and substantially improved outcomes were observed in both groups. From a health care system perspective, clinical leadership should implement whichever approach is most sustainable.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02738944.

Stepped care for the treatment of depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The Stepped Care Model (SCM) proposes a sequential approach in the treatment of depression, applying interventions of increasing intensity according to the level of severity of the individual.

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out until January 2020 in eight electronic databases. We included randomized (RCT) and non-randomized controlled trials comparing the SCM to usual non-sequential care.

RESULTS

Eighteen RCT with patients with confirmed or probable depression diagnosis were included. Meta-analyses yielded high heterogeneity, and subgroup analyses showed significant effects of the SCM only in studies with baseline moderately severe symptoms on average, compared to samples with mild/moderate depression. In the former subgroup, effects at 3-6 and 9-12 months were small for symptoms' reduction (g = -0.33, 95%CI: -0.55, -0.17 and -0.34, 95%CI: -0.53, -0.16) and moderate-to-strong in response and remission (Risk Ratios between 1.70-1.90). Overall, a significant benefit on quality of life was also observed (6 months: g = 0.31, 95%CI: 0.12, 0.49; 12 months: g = 0.18, 95%CI: 0.06, 0.31). More patients in the SCM groups were prescribed antidepressants at 6 months (RR = 1.31, 95%CI: 1.09, 1.57; I² = 87%).

LIMITATIONS

The search does not guarantee the identification of all the relevant literature. Most included studies show uncertain or high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The SCM seems to outperform usual care in populations with at least moderately severe symptoms on average. Results show high heterogeneity and future research should explore its sources.

Japanese project for telepsychiatry evaluation during COVID-19: Treatment comparison trial (J-PROTECT): Rationale, design, and methodology

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the mental health of people around the world. Anxiety related to infection, stress and stigma caused by the forced changes in daily life have reportedly increased the incidence and symptoms of depression, anxiety disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Under such circumstances, telepsychiatry is gaining importance and attracting a great deal of attention. However, few large pragmatic clinical trials on the use of telepsychiatry targeting multiple psychiatric disorders have been conducted to date.

Methods

The targeted study cohort will consist of adults (>18 years) who meet the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for either (1) depressive disorders, (2) anxiety disorders, or (3) obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. Patients will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either a “telepsychiatry group” (at least 50% of treatments to be conducted using telemedicine, with at least one face-to-face treatment [FTF] within six months) or an “FTF group” (all treatments to be conducted FTF, with no telemedicine). Both groups will receive the usual treatment covered by public medical insurance. The study will utilize a master protocol design in that there will be primary and secondary outcomes for the entire group regardless of diagnosis, as well as the outcomes for each individual disorder group.

Discussion

This study will be a non-inferiority trial to test that the treatment effect of telepsychiatry is not inferior to that of FTF alone. This study will provide useful insights into the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the practice of psychiatry.

Trial Registration

jRCT1030210037, Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT).

Addressing anhedonia to increase depression treatment engagement

Anhedonia, or reward system dysfunction, is associated with poorer treatment outcomes among depressed individuals. The role of anhedonia in treatment engagement, however, has not yet been explored. We review research on components of reward functioning impaired in depression, including effort valuation, reward anticipation, initial responsiveness, reward learning, reward probability, and reward delay, highlighting potential barriers to treatment engagement associated with these components. We then propose interventions to improve treatment initiation and continuation by addressing deficits in each component of reward functioning, focusing on modifications of existing evidence-based interventions to meet the needs of individuals with heightened anhedonia. We describe potential settings for these interventions and times at which they can be delivered during the process of referring individuals to mental health treatment, conducting intakes or assessments, and providing treatment. Additionally, we note the advantages of using screening processes already in place in primary care, workplace, school, and online settings to identify individuals with heightened anhedonia who may benefit from these interventions. We conclude with suggestions for future research on the impact of anhedonia on treatment engagement and the efficacy of interventions to address it. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Many depressed individuals who might benefit from treatment do not initiate it or discontinue early. One barrier to treatment engagement may be anhedonia, a core symptom of depression characterized by loss of interest or pleasure in usual activities. We describe brief interventions to improve treatment engagement in individuals with anhedonia that can be implemented during the referral process or early in treatment. We argue that interventions aiming to improve treatment engagement in depressed individuals that target anhedonia may be particularly effective.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Provider Perceptions of Telemental Health

The present study was designed to assess mental health provider attitudes and perceptions of telemental health (TMH) prior to and during the COVID-19 Pandemic, as well as the nature of their TMH utilization. The study aimed to gather information about positive and negative attitudes towards TMH, perceptions and correlates based on the modality of care, and beliefs about the overall effectiveness of TMH as compared to face-to-face care. The current study is part of a larger mixed methods project utilizing a repeated cross-sectional design. An online survey was administered to a sample of 1448 mental health providers and included demographic and professional information, experiences with and perceptions of TMH prior to and during the COVID-19 Pandemic, as well as a brief measure of pandemic-related stress. The COVID-19 Pandemic resulted in an increased use of TMH in the study sample. During COVID-19, providers reported increased agreement with TMH being necessary, important, and effective for care delivery. Providers who primarily used video, compared with telephone, reported that TMH was more useful, satisfying, and effective. While negative attitude towards TMH was predicted only by prior attitudes and belief in TMH effectiveness, positive attitude towards TMH was also predicted by female sex and current level of pandemic related stress. TMH use during the pandemic was predicted by primary use of video platform and previous TMH use. The 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic resulted in increased use of TMH and significantly increased positive perceptions about TMH among mental health providers.

Psychiatrist and Psychologist Experiences with Telehealth and Remote Collaborative Care in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Availability of mental health services is limited in the rural United States. Two promising models to reach patients with limited access to care are telehealth referral and collaborative care. The objective of this study was to assess telepsychiatrist- and telepsychologist-level facilitators and barriers to satisfaction with and implementation of these 2 telehealth models in rural settings.

METHODS

Focus groups were held in 2019 using a semistructured interview guide. Participants were off-site telepsychiatrists (N = 10) and telepsychologists (N = 4) for primary care clinics across 3 states (Washington, Michigan, and Arkansas) involved in a recent pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial. Qualitative analysis occurred inductively by 2 independent coders.

FINDINGS

Participants were satisfied with the models partly owing to good patient rapport and expanding access to care. Teamwork was highlighted as a facilitator in collaborative care and was often related to work with care managers. However, participants described communication with primary care providers as a challenge, especially in the telehealth referral arm. Barriers centered on variability of logistical processes (eg, symptom monitoring, scheduling, electronic medical record processes, and credentialing) among sites. Staff turnover, variable clinic investment, and inadequacy of training were possible explanations for these barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants described high motivation to provide team-based, remote care for patients, though they experienced operational challenges. Centralized credentialing, scheduling, and record keeping are possible solutions. These findings are important because consulting psychiatrists and psychologists may play a leadership role in the dissemination of these models.

Access and attitudinal barriers to engagement in integrated primary care mental health treatment for rural populations

PURPOSE

Compared to urban areas, rural populations are less likely to engage in mental health care. Using data from the Study to Promote Innovation in Rural Integrated Telepsychiatry, we examined the effect of rurality on engagement in mental health treatment as well as the role of potential mediators.

METHODS

Data were obtained from medical records and surveys. We defined rurality using the rural-urban commuting area codes. Baseline mediators included the Endorsed and Anticipated Stigma Inventory and the Assessment of Perceived Access to Care. Engagement outcomes included number of psychotherapy visits and self-reported medication use. We used path analysis to examine the relationship between rurality and engagement and the influence of mediating variables.

FINDINGS

Rural participants were less likely to initiate psychotherapy (OR = 0.49; adjusted P = .036), although rurality was not associated with number of psychotherapy sessions or medication use. Rurality was associated with a small elevation in negative beliefs about mental health, but this potential mediator was not associated with engagement. Rurality was negatively associated with lower perceived need for treatment (OR = 0.67, adjusted P = .040), which was in turn positively associated with initiating psychotherapy (OR = 1.99, adjusted P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither rurality itself nor the potential mediators had a large effect on engagement. Federally Qualified Health Centers offering colocated and/or integrated mental health care appear to be mostly mitigating rural-urban disparities in mental health engagement. Improving rates of psychotherapy initiation for rural patients should remain a policy goal.

Remote Collaborative Care with Off-Site Behavioral Health Care Managers: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

In the United States, the majority of patients who require behavioral health care do not receive it due to an overall shortage of behavioral health specialists. The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is a team-based, highly-coordinated approach to treating common mental health conditions in primary care that has a robust evidence base. Several recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the effectiveness of remote CoCM teams. As telehealth technology and uptake expands, understanding the evidence for remote CoCM becomes increasingly crucial to inform CoCM practice and implementation.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review RCTs regarding the effectiveness of remote CoCM teams in treating common psychiatric conditions in primary care and medical settings.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used to structure our review. Our search strategy and development of search terms was informed by knowledge and review of the CoCM literature. Articles were reviewed by three authors and once selected, sent to two authors for further data extraction to describe various study characteristics and process measures relating to remote CoCM.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 13,211 articles, nine of which met inclusion criteria. The nine studies collectively demonstrate effectiveness of remote CoCM in treating a range of behavioral health conditions [(depression (n=7), anxiety (n=2), and PTSD (n=1)], across various populations and settings. Sample sizes ranged from 191 patients to 704 patients, publication dates from 2004 to 2018, and studies were conducted from 2000 to 2014. Various process measures were also reported.

CONCLUSIONS

As the nine studies included in our systematic review demonstrate, remote CoCM can be effective in treating a range of behavioral health conditions in various primary care and specialty medical settings. These findings suggest organizations may have more flexibility in building their CoCM team and drawing upon wider workforces than previously recognized. As recent shifts in telehealth policy and practice continue to motivate telehealth approaches, further research that can inform best practices for remote CoCM will be useful and valuable to those making organizational decisions when implementing integrated care models.

Implementation of Telemental Health Services Before COVID-19: Rapid Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

Telemental health care has been rapidly adopted for maintaining services during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a substantial interest is now being devoted in its future role. Service planning and policy making for recovery from the pandemic and beyond should draw on both COVID-19 experiences and the substantial research evidence accumulated before this pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to conduct an umbrella review of systematic reviews available on the literature and evidence-based guidance on telemental health, including both qualitative and quantitative literature.

METHODS

Three databases were searched between January 2010 and August 2020 for systematic reviews meeting the predefined criteria. The retrieved reviews were independently screened, and those meeting the inclusion criteria were synthesized and assessed for risk of bias. Narrative synthesis was used to report these findings.

RESULTS

In total, 19 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. A total of 15 reviews examined clinical effectiveness, 8 reported on the aspects of telemental health implementation, 10 reported on acceptability to service users and clinicians, 2 reported on cost-effectiveness, and 1 reported on guidance. Most reviews were assessed to be of low quality. The findings suggested that video-based communication could be as effective and acceptable as face-to-face formats, at least in the short term. Evidence on the extent of digital exclusion and how it can be overcome and that on some significant contexts, such as children and young people's services and inpatient settings, was found to be lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

This umbrella review suggests that telemental health has the potential to be an effective and acceptable form of service delivery. However, we found limited evidence on the impact of its large-scale implementation across catchment areas. Combining previous evidence and COVID-19 experiences may allow realistic planning for the future implementation of telemental health.

Health policy experts' perspectives on implementing mental health specialist video consultations in routine primary care - a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Many patients with mental disorders are treated by their general practitioner (GP). Innovative technology-based integrated care models (e.g., mental health specialist video consultations) have been proposed to facilitate access to specialist services in primary care settings. While perspectives of patients and providers have been examined, there is little insight into the perspectives of health policy experts on such models. The purpose of this study was to examine the perspectives of health policy experts on (1) current challenges for continuity of care, (2) anticipated benefits and barriers for implementation of mental health specialist video consultations along with (3) practical and regulative preconditions for sustained implementation in primary care.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional qualitative study, we conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with health policy experts representing various stakeholders in the German health care system: health insurances, governmental bodies, clinicians' professional associations, and patient representatives. Following a critical realism approach, we applied a qualitative inductive content analysis to derive key themes from the material.

RESULTS

Health policy experts saw long waiting times for patients and a lack of collaboration between in- and outpatient mental health services as well as mental health specialists and GPs as main barriers for current continuity of care. Health policy experts also felt that video consultations bear great potential to foster coordinated care between GPs and specialists and ensure timely referral for severely burdened patients. Increased workload for the general practice staff to facilitate video consultations and difficulties in establishing reliable therapeutic alliances between patients and specialists via remote treatment were considered as major barriers. Health policy experts varied significantly in their level of knowledge concerning legal frameworks and regulations pertaining to video consultations. However, the implementation of appropriate reimbursement schemes and sufficient data protection were regarded as the major regulative challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Health policy experts mostly consider mental health specialist video consultations as a promising way to overcome current challenges for the management of patients with mental disorders at the interface between primary and specialist care. To ensure sustained implementation, a multi-stakeholder approach accounting for the perspective of health policy experts, patients, and providers should be followed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00012487.

Primary care and mental health: Where do we go from here?

Primary care has been dubbed the “de facto” mental health system of the United States since the 1970s. Since then, various forms of mental health delivery models for primary care have proven effective in improving patient outcomes and satisfaction and reducing costs. Despite increases in collaborative care implementation and reimbursement, prevalence rates of major depression in the United States remain unchanged while anxiety and suicide rates continue to climb. Meanwhile, primary care task forces in countries like the United Kingdom and Canada are recommending against depression screening in primary care altogether, citing lack of trials demonstrating improved outcomes in screened vs unscreened patients when the same treatment is available, high false-positive results, and small treatment effects. In this perspective, a primary care physician and two psychiatrists address the question of why we are not making headway in treating common mental health conditions in primary care. In addition, we propose systemic changes to improve the dissemination of mental health treatment in primary care.

Patterns of Mental Health Care Before Initiation of Telemental Health Services

BACKGROUND

Use of telemental health has increased among rural Medicare beneficiaries, particularly among individuals with serious mental illness (SMI). Little is known about what leads to the initiation of telemental health.

OBJECTIVE

To categorize the different patterns of mental health care use before initiation of telemental health services among individuals with SMI.

METHODS

A cohort of rural beneficiaries with SMI (defined as schizophrenia/related psychotic disorders or bipolar disorder) with an index telemental health visit in 2010-2017 was built using claims for a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries. The authors used latent class analysis to identify classes of mental health care use in the 6 months before the index telemental health visits. Across the classes, the authors also described characteristics of index and subsequent mental health visits.

RESULTS

The cohort included 4930 rural Medicare beneficiaries with SMI. Three classes of mental health care use before initiation of telemental health were identified. The largest class (n=3066) had minimal use of primary care provider mental health care and the second largest class (n=1537) had minimal specialty mental health care. The smallest class (n=327) was characterized by recent hospitalization or emergency department care. In the overall cohort, index visits were frequently established visits and were often with specialty prescribers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight 3 distinct patterns of care before telemental health initiation, providing insight into the role that telemedicine may play in mental health care for rural Medicare beneficiaries with SMI. Overall, telemental health was most often used to maintain care with existing providers.

Barriers and strategies to integrate medical genetics and primary care in underserved populations: a scoping review

Despite clinical and technological advances, serious gaps remain in delivering genetic services due to disparities in workforce distribution and lack of coverage for genetic testing and counseling. Genetic services delivery, particularly in medically underserved populations, may rely heavily on primary care providers (PCPs). This study aims to identify barriers to integrating genetic services and primary care, and strategies to support integration, by conducting a scoping review. Literature synthesis found barriers most frequently cited by PCPs including insufficient knowledge about genetics and risk assessment, lack of access to geneticists, and insufficient time to address these challenges. Telegenetics, patient-centered care, and learning communities are strategies to overcome these barriers. Telegenetics supplements face-to-face clinics by providing remote access to genetic services. It may also be used for physician consultations and education. Patient-centered care allows providers, families, and patients to coordinate services and resources. Access to expert information provides a critical resource for PCPs. Learning communities may represent a mechanism that facilitates information exchange and knowledge sharing among different providers. As PCPs often play a crucial role caring for patients with genetic disorders in underserved areas, barriers to primary care-medical genetics integration must be addressed to improve access. Strategies, such as telegenetics, promotion of evidence-based guidelines, point-of-care risk assessment tools, tailored education in genetics-related topics, and other system-level strategies, will facilitate better genetics and primary care integration, which in turn, may improve genetic service delivery to patients residing in underserved communities.

Patient satisfaction with partial hospital telehealth treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: Comparison to in-person treatment

Most research evaluating telehealth psychiatric treatment has been conducted in outpatient settings. There is a lack of research assessing the efficacy of telehealth treatment in more acute, intensive treatment settings such as a partial hospital. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, much of ambulatory behavioral health treatment has transitioned to a telehealth, or virtual, format. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we compared patient satisfaction of partial hospital services delivered via telehealth to in-person treatment provided to patients treated prior to the COVID-19 outbreak. The sample included 240 patients who were treated virtually from May, 2020 to October, 2020, and a comparison group of 240 patients who were treated in the in-person partial program a year earlier. Patients completed self-administered measures of patient satisfaction after the initial evaluation and at the end of treatment. For both the in-person and telehealth methods of delivering partial hospital level of care, patients were highly satisfied with the initial diagnostic evaluation and were optimistic at admission that treatment would be helpful. At the completion of treatment, both groups were highly satisfied with all components of the treatment program and almost all would recommend treatment to a friend or family member. Thus, patient satisfaction was as high with telehealth partial hospital treatment as with in-person treatment.

A review of evaluation approaches for telemental health programs

PURPOSE

Although studies have examined the effectiveness of telemental health programs, optimal approaches for their evaluation remain unclear. We sought to review the outcomes used to evaluate telemental health programs.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar for peer-reviewed studies published between January 2010 until October 2019, and we excluded review articles, opinion papers, presentations, abstracts, and program report without data.

RESULTS

1310 articles were identified, 34 of which were reviewed. Studies used a combination of non-clinical and clinical outcomes, most commonly engagement and impact rates, and standardised clinical measures. Very few studies examined technological feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and qualitative satisfaction reports.

CONCLUSIONS

This review is the first to summarise approaches to evaluate telemental health programs. Strengths and weaknesses of the evaluation outcomes are discussed in this review, highlighting essential factors that should be taken into consideration when developing a standardised framework for the evaluation of future telemental health programs.KEY POINTSThe methods used to evaluate telemental health programs are varied and no gold-standard for measurement of success exists.Clinical and non-clinical outcomes are being used to evaluate telemental health programs.More emphasis should be placed on feasibility measures such as cost-effectiveness.Therapeutic alliance should be a crucial part of evaluation of any telemental health program.Longer follow up times and larger sample sizes, as well as more diverse populations, are needed to generalise outcomes.Utilisation of clinical tools to assess success should be limited to standardised measures commonly used in clinical practice.

Telepsychiatry adoption across hospitals in the United States: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Access to psychiatric care is critical for patients discharged from hospital psychiatric units to ensure continuity of care. When face-to-face follow-up is unavailable or undesirable, telepsychiatry becomes a promising alternative. This study aimed to investigate hospital- and county-level characteristics associated with telepsychiatry adoption.

METHODS

Cross-sectional national data of 3475 acute care hospitals were derived from the 2017 American Hospital Association Annual Survey. Generalized linear regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with telepsychiatry adoption.

RESULTS

About one-sixth (548 [15.8%]) of hospitals reported having telepsychiatry with a wide variation across states. Rural noncore hospitals were less likely to adopt telepsychiatry (8.3%) than hospitals in rural micropolitan (13.6%) and urban counties (19.4%). Hospitals with both outpatient and inpatient psychiatric care services (marginal difference [95% CI]: 16.0% [12.1% to 19.9%]) and hospitals only with outpatient psychiatric services (6.5% [3.7% to 9.4%]) were more likely to have telepsychiatry than hospitals with neither psychiatric services. Federal hospitals (48.9% [32.5 to 65.3%]), system-affiliated hospitals (3.9% [1.2% to 6.6%]), hospitals with larger bed size (Quartile IV vs. I: 6.2% [0.7% to 11.6%]), and hospitals with greater ratio of Medicaid inpatient days to total inpatient days (Quartile IV vs. I: 4.9% [0.3% to 9.4%]) were more likely to have telepsychiatry than their counterparts. Private non-profit hospitals (- 6.9% [- 11.7% to - 2.0%]) and hospitals in counties designated as whole mental health professional shortage areas (- 6.6% [- 12.7% to - 0.5%]) were less likely to have telepsychiatry.

CONCLUSIONS

Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, telepsychiatry adoption in US hospitals was low with substantial variations by urban and rural status and by state in 2017. This raises concerns about access to psychiatric services and continuity of care for patients discharged from hospitals.

Rural Telemedicine Use Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Repeated Cross-sectional Study

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a notable increase in telemedicine adoption. However, the impact of the pandemic on telemedicine use at a population level in rural and remote settings remains unclear.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate changes in the rate of telemedicine use among rural populations and identify patient characteristics associated with telemedicine use prior to and during the pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study on all monthly and quarterly rural telemedicine visits from January 2012 to June 2020, using administrative data from Ontario, Canada. We compared the changes in telemedicine use among residents of rural and urban regions of Ontario prior to and during the pandemic.

Results

Before the pandemic, telemedicine use was steadily low in 2012-2019 for both rural and urban populations but slightly higher overall for rural patients (11 visits per 1000 patients vs 7 visits per 1000 patients in December 2019, P<.001). The rate of telemedicine visits among rural patients significantly increased to 147 visits per 1000 patients in June 2020. A similar but steeper increase (P=.15) was observed among urban patients (220 visits per 1000 urban patients). Telemedicine use increased across all age groups, with the highest rates reported among older adults aged ≥65 years (77 visits per 100 patients in 2020). The proportions of patients with at least 1 telemedicine visit were similar across the adult age groups (n=82,246/290,401, 28.3% for patients aged 18-49 years, n=79,339/290,401, 27.3% for patients aged 50-64 years, and n=80,833/290,401, 27.8% for patients aged 65-79 years), but lower among younger patients <18 years (n=23,699/290,401, 8.2%) and older patients ≥80 years (n=24,284/290,401, 8.4%) in 2020 (P<.001). There were more female users than male users of telemedicine (n=158,643/290,401, 54.6% vs n=131,758/290,401, 45.4%, respectively, in 2020; P<.001). There was a significantly higher proportion of telemedicine users residing in relatively less rural than in more rural regions (n=261,814/290,401, 90.2% vs n=28,587/290,401, 9.8%, respectively, in 2020; P<.001).

Conclusions

Telemedicine adoption increased in rural and remote areas during the COVID-19 pandemic, but its use increased in urban and less rural populations. Future studies should investigate the potential barriers to telemedicine use among rural patients and the impact of rural telemedicine on patient health care utilization and outcomes.

Mental Health Specialist Video Consultations Versus Treatment-as-Usual for Patients With Depression or Anxiety Disorders in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial

BACKGROUND

Most people affected by depression or anxiety disorders are treated solely by their primary care physician. Access to specialized mental health care is impeded by patients' comorbidity and immobility in aging societies and long waiting times at the providers' end. Video-based integrated care models may leverage limited resources more efficiently and provide timely specialized care in primary care settings.

OBJECTIVE

The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of mental health specialist video consultations with primary care patients with depression or anxiety disorders.

METHODS

Participants were recruited by their primary care physicians during regular practice visits. Patients who had experienced at least moderate symptoms of depression and/or anxiety disorders were considered eligible for the study. Patients were randomized into 2 groups receiving either treatment-as-usual as provided by their general practitioner or up to 5 video consultations conducted by a mental health specialist. Video consultations focused on systematic diagnosis and proactive monitoring using validated clinical rating scales, the establishment of an effective working alliance, and a stepped-care algorithm within integrated care adjusting treatments based on clinical outcomes. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment, rate of loss to follow-up, acceptability of treatment, and attendance at sessions. Effectiveness outcomes included depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), burden of specific somatic complaints (Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale-12), recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale-German [RAS-G]), and perception of chronic illness care (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care), which were measured at baseline and 16 weeks postallocation by assessors blinded to the group allocation.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients with depression and/or anxiety disorders were randomized, 23 in the intervention group and 27 in the treatment-as-usual group. The recruitment yield (number randomized per number screened) and the consent rate (number randomized per number eligible) were 69% (50/73) and 86% (50/58), respectively. Regarding acceptability, 87% (20/23) of the participants in the intervention group completed the intervention. Of the 108 planned video consultations, 102 (94.4%) were delivered. Follow-up rates were 96% (22/23) and 85% (23/27) for the intervention and control groups, respectively. The change from baseline scores at postmeasurement for the No Domination by Symptoms domain of recovery (RAS-G) was somewhat higher in the intervention group than in the control group (Mann-Whitney U test: rank-biserial r=0.19; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.46; P=.18). We did not detect any notable differences between the intervention and control groups in terms of other effectiveness outcomes. We did not observe any serious adverse events related to the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention and study procedures were found to be feasible for patients, primary care practice staff, and mental health specialists. A sufficiently powered pragmatic trial on mental health specialist video consultations should be conducted to investigate their effectiveness in routine care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00015812; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015812.

Implementing Videoconference CBT for Depression in Routine Outpatient Care: Outcome, Working Alliance, and Influence of Patients’ Technology Commitment

<b><i>Background:</i></b> While videoconference cognitive behavioral therapy (V-CBT) has shown promising results in controlled studies, data from routine care are rare. We examined (1) changes in depressive symptoms and life satisfaction during V-CBT in German routine outpatient care for patients with depressive disorders, (2) the quality of the established working alliance, and (3) the influence of working alliance and the patients’ technology commitment on outcomes. <b><i>Patients and Methods:</i></b> Patients with primary diagnoses of depressive disorders were treated with V-CBT and concurrent internet-guided self-help via the MindDoc program, which operates within the regulations of the German health care system. The patients completed the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) for depressive symptoms, an item on life satisfaction before and after treatment, the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI), and the Technology Commitment questionnaire for beliefs about handling technology. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Fifty-nine patients (71.2% female) with a mean age of 44.46 years (SD = 12.86) were included in the analyses. Longitudinal multilevel mixed models revealed improvements in depressive symptoms (Cohen’s <i>d</i> = 1.27) and life satisfaction (<i>d</i> = 0.80). The working alliance was good and showed a positive association with outcome, while technology commitment did not. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> V-CBT seems effective in reducing depressive symptoms, increasing life satisfaction, and establishing a good working alliance in routine care.