Objective: The uptake of digital interventions in mental health care (MHC) has been slow, as many therapists and patients believe that in-person contact is essential for establishing a good working relationship and good outcomes in treatment. The public health policies regarding social distancing during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced an abrupt transformation of MHC provisions for outpatients: Since mid-March 2020, nearly all in-person contact was replaced with videoconferencing. The COVID-19 crisis offered a unique opportunity to investigate whether MHC with videoconferencing yields inferior results as compared to in-person interventions.
Method: In a large urban MHC facility in the Netherlands, measurement-based care is routine practice. Outcome data are regularly collected to support shared decision making and monitor patient progress. For this study, pretest and post-test data were used to compare outcomes for three cohorts: treatments performed prior to, partially during and entirely during the COVID-19 lockdown. Outcomes were compared in two large data sets: Basic MHC (N = 1392) and Specialized MHC (N = 1040).
Results: Therapeutic outcomes appeared robust for COVID-19 conditions across the three cohorts: No differences in outcomes were found between treatments that were conducted during lockdown compared to in-person treatments prior to COVID-19, or treatments which started in-person, but needed to be continued by means of videoconferencing.
Discussion: Videoconferencing care during the COVID-19 pandemic had similar outcomes compared to traditional in-person care. These real-world results corroborate findings of previous randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses in which videoconferencing and in-person care has been directly compared in terms of clinical effectiveness.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9015637 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2713 | DOI Listing |
Midwifery
January 2025
Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology. Institute of Biomedicine of Seville (IBIS), University of Seville, Spain. Electronic address:
Background: During the perinatal period, risk of depression and anxiety (D&A) increases. As in other crisis events, the COVID-19 pandemic, imposed social distancing measures, diminished social support and changes in perinatal healthcare provision which heightened this risk. This study aimed to examine how changes in social and healthcare provider support during the pandemic affected coping strategies and depression and anxiety symptoms (D&As) among perinatal women.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur Psychiatry
January 2025
Copenhagen Respiratory Research (COP:RESP),Department of Internal Medicine, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Hellerup, Denmark.
JMIR Public Health Surveill
January 2025
Center for Global Health, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, United States.
Background: Numerous studies have assessed the risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure and infection among health care workers during the pandemic. However, far fewer studies have investigated the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on essential workers in other sectors. Moreover, guidance for maintaining a safely operating workplace in sectors outside of health care remains limited.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRisk Manag Healthc Policy
January 2025
School of Public Health, Gudie University Project, Kampala, Uganda.
Aim: This study examined citizens' knowledge and compliance with COVID-19 standard operating procedures (SOPs), vaccine acceptance and hesitancy, and factors that could influence these behaviors.
Methods: The study that utilised the Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) approach was conducted in eight districts of Central Uganda; Kiboga, Kyankwanzi, Mubende, Kasanda, Mityana, Luwero, Nakaseke, and Nakasongola districts. Each district was divided into five supervision areas (SAs).
Cureus
December 2024
Public Health, Nova Southeastern University Dr. Kiran C. Patel College of Osteopathic Medicine, Fort Lauderdale, USA.
Adolescents with diabetes mellitus (DM) experience poorer glycemic outcomes and lower adherence to self-management regimens compared to other age groups. The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed new barriers to DM self-management, including social distancing measures and additional stressors. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature to examine self-management regimens and outcomes among adolescents aged 10-17 years with type 1 and type 2 DM during the pandemic.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!