A survey of eMedia-delivered interventions for schizophrenia used in randomized controlled trials

A mixed methods analysis of existing assessment and evaluation tools (AETs) for mental health applications

Introduction

Mental health Applications (MH Apps) can potentially improve access to high-quality mental health care. However, the recent rapid expansion of MH Apps has created growing concern regarding their safety and effectiveness, leading to the development of AETs (Assessment and Evaluation Tools) to help guide users. This article provides a critical, mixed methods analysis of existing AETs for MH Apps by reviewing the criteria used to evaluate MH Apps and assessing their effectiveness as evaluation tools.

Methods

To identify relevant AETs, gray and scholarly literature were located through stakeholder consultation, Internet searching via Google and a literature search of bibliographic databases Medline, APA PsycInfo, and LISTA. Materials in English that provided a tool or method to evaluate MH Apps and were published from January 1, 2000, to January 26, 2021 were considered for inclusion.

Results

Thirteen relevant AETs targeted for MH Apps met the inclusion criteria. The qualitative analysis of AETs and their evaluation criteria revealed that despite purporting to focus on MH Apps, the included AETs did not contain criteria that made them more specific to MH Apps than general health applications. There appeared to be very little agreed-upon terminology in this field, and the focus of selection criteria in AETs is often IT-related, with a lesser focus on clinical issues, equity, and scientific evidence. The quality of AETs was quantitatively assessed using the AGREE II, a standardized tool for evaluating assessment guidelines. Three out of 13 AETs were deemed 'recommended' using the AGREE II.

Discussion

There is a need for further improvements to existing AETs. To realize the full potential of MH Apps and reduce stakeholders' concerns, AETs must be developed within the current laws and governmental health policies, be specific to mental health, be feasible to implement and be supported by rigorous research methodology, medical education, and public awareness.

Video intervention for the psychiatric waiting room: proof-of-concept randomised controlled trial of RESOLVE (Relaxation Exercise, SOLVing problem and cognitive Errors)

BACKGROUND

The waiting room in psychiatric services can provide an ideal setting for offering evidence-based psychological interventions that can be delivered through electronic media. Currently, there is no intervention available that have been developed or tested in mental health.

AIMS

This proof-of-concept study aimed to evaluate a pilot design of RESOLVE (Relaxation Exercise, SOLving problem and cognitiVe Errors) to test the procedure and obtain outcome data to inform future, definitive trials (trial registration at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02536924, REB Number: PSIY-477-15).

METHOD

Forty participants were enrolled and equally randomised to the intervention, RESOLVE plus treatment as usual arm (TAU), or to a control group (TAU only). Those in the intervention group watched RESOLVE in a room adjacent to the waiting area. Participants in the control received routine care. Outcome measures included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluations outcome measure; and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule. These measures were performed by a masked assessor at baseline and at 6-week follow-up. Additionally, we measured the number of contacts with mental health services during the prior 4 weeks. Both intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The study proved feasible. We were able to recruit the required number of participants. There was a statistically significant improvement in depression (P < 0.001), anxiety (P < 0.001), general psychopathology (P < 0.001) and disability (P = 0.0361) in favour of the intervention group. People in the intervention group were less likely to contact the service (P = 0.012) post-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings provide preliminary evidence that evidence-based psychosocial interventions can be delivered through electronic media in a waiting-room setting. The outcome data from this study will be used for future definitive trials.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

None.