scholarly journals Barriers and facilitators to user engagement with digital mental health interventions: A systematic review (Preprint)

10.2196/24387 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Borghouts ◽  
Elizabeth Eikey ◽  
Gloria Mark ◽  
Cinthia De Leon ◽  
Stephen M. Schueller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
User Engagement ◽  
Mental Health Interventions

scholarly journals Barriers and facilitators to user engagement with digital mental health interventions: A systematic review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Borghouts ◽  
Elizabeth Eikey ◽  
Gloria Mark ◽  
Cinthia De Leon ◽  
Stephen M. Schueller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
User Engagement ◽  
Mental Health Support ◽  
Mental Health Interventions ◽  
Health Support ◽  
Common Barriers

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions, that deliver mental health support via technologies such as a mobile apps, can increase access to mental health support, and many studies have demonstrated their effectiveness in improving symptoms. However, user engagement, referring to a user’s uptake and sustained interactions with these interventions, varies. OBJECTIVE The aim of this systematic review is to identify common barriers and facilitators influencing user engagement with digital mental health interventions. METHODS A systematic search was conducted of the SCOPUS, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Empirical studies reporting qualitative and/or quantitative data were included. RESULTS 208 articles met the inclusion criteria. Included articles used a variety of methodologies including interviews, surveys, focus groups, workshops, field studies, and analysis of user reviews. Factors extracted for coding were related to the end user, the program/content offered by the intervention, and the technology and implementation environment. Common barriers included severe mental health issues that hampered engagement, technical issues, and a lack of personalization. Common facilitators were social connectedness facilitated by the intervention, increased insight into health, and a feeling of being in control of one’s own health. CONCLUSIONS While previous research suggests that digital mental health interventions can be useful in supporting mental health, contextual factors are important determinants as to whether users actually engage with these interventions. The factors identified in this review can provide guidance when evaluating digital mental health interventions to help explain and understand user engagement, and can inform the design and development of new digital interventions.

An engagement-facilitation intervention (EFI) for increasing uptake and engagement for self-guided online mental health interventions: Consumer-guided development (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia Gulliver ◽  
Alison L Calear ◽  
Matthew Sunderland ◽  
Frances Kay-Lambkin ◽  
Louise M Farrer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Health Program ◽  
Mental Health Program ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Health Programs ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Mental Health Interventions ◽  
Mental Health Programs

BACKGROUND Self-guided online mental health programs are effective in treating and preventing mental health problems. However, both the uptake and engagement with these programs in the community is suboptimal, and there is limited current evidence indicating how to increase the use of existing evidence-based programs. OBJECTIVE The current study aims to investigate the views of people with lived experience of depression and anxiety on the barriers and facilitators to using e-mental health interventions and to use these perspectives to help develop an engagement-facilitation intervention (EFI) to increase uptake and engagement with self-guided online mental health programs. METHODS A total of 24 community members (female = 21; male = 3) with lived experience of depression and/or anxiety participated in four focus groups that discussed: 1) barriers and facilitators to self-guided e-mental health programs, 2) specific details needed to help them decide to use an online program, and 3) the appearance, delivery mode, and functionality of content for the proposed EFI. A total of 14 of the focus group attendees participated in a subsequent follow-up survey to evaluate the resultant draft EFI. Data were thematically analysed using both inductive and deductive methods. RESULTS Participants suggested that the critical component of an EFI was information that would challenge personal barriers to engagement with psychosocial interventions. These were providing personalised feedback about symptoms, information about the content and effectiveness of the e-mental health program, normalisation of participation in e-mental health programs including testimonials, and brief information on data security. Reminders, rewards, feedback about their progress, and coaching were all mentioned as being useful in assisting people to continue to engage with a program once they had started. Feedback on the developed EFI was positive; with participants reporting satisfaction with the content of the EFI and that it would likely positively affect their use of an e-mental health program. CONCLUSIONS EFIs have the potential to improve the uptake of e-mental health programs in the community and should focus on providing information on the content and effectiveness of e-mental health programs, as well as normalising their use. There is strong value in involving people with a lived experience in the design and development of EFIs to maximise their effectiveness.

scholarly journals Mental health interventions for children in foster care: A systematic review

2016 ◽  
Vol 70 ◽  
pp. 65-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin P. Hambrick ◽  
Shani Oppenheim-Weller ◽  
Amanda M. N'zi ◽  
Heather N. Taussig
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Foster Care ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Children In Foster Care ◽  
Mental Health Interventions

The effects of non-clinician guidance on effectiveness and process outcomes of digital mental health interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calista Leung ◽  
Julia Pei ◽  
Kristen Hudec ◽  
Farhud Shams ◽  
Richard Munthali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Process Outcomes ◽  
Mental Health Interventions

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions are increasingly prevalent in the current context of rapidly evolving technology, and research indicates that they yield effectiveness outcomes comparable to in-person treatment. Integrating professionals (i.e. psychologists, physicians) into digital mental health interventions has been common, and the inclusion of guidance within programs can increase adherence to interventions. However, employing professionals to enhance mental health programs may undermine the scalability of digital interventions. Therefore, delegating guidance tasks to paraprofessionals (peer supporters, technicians, lay counsellors, or other non-clinicians) can help reduce costs and increase accessibility. OBJECTIVE This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes of non-clinician guided digital mental health interventions. METHODS Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PSYCInfo) were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2020 examining digital mental health interventions. Three journals focused on digital intervention were also hand searched and grey literature was searched using ProQuest and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2. Data were collected on effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes, and meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and adherence outcomes. Non-clinician guided interventions were compared with treatment as usual, clinician-guided interventions, and unguided interventions. RESULTS Thirteen studies qualified for inclusion. Results indicate that non-clinician guided interventions yielded higher post-treatment effectiveness outcomes when compared to conditions involving control programs (e.g. online psychoeducation, monitored attention control) or waitlist controls (k=7, Hedges g=-0.73 (95% CI -1.08 to -0.38)). There are significant differences between non-clinician guided interventions and unguided interventions as well (k=6, Hedges g=-0.17 (95% CI -0.23 to -0.11)). In addition, non-clinician guided interventions did not differ in effectiveness from clinician-guided interventions (k=3, Hedges g=0.08 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.17)). These results suggest that guided digital mental health interventions are helpful to improve mental health outcomes regardless of the qualification, and that the presence of a non-clinician guide improves effectiveness outcomes more than no guidance. Non-clinician guided interventions did not yield significantly different effects on adherence outcomes when compared with unguided interventions (k=3, OR 1.58 (95% CI 0.51 to 4.92)), although a general trend of improved adherence was observed within non-clinician guided interventions. CONCLUSIONS Integrating paraprofessionals and non-clinicians appear to improve outcomes of digital mental health interventions, and may also enhance adherence outcomes (though the trend was nonsignificant). Further research should focus on the specific types of tasks these paraprofessionals can successfully provide (i.e. psychosocial support, therapeutic alliance, technical augmentation) and their associated outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL The protocol is preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020191226).

Systematic Review and Critique of Methods for Economic Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Interventions

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Jankovic ◽  
Laura Bojke ◽  
David Marshall ◽  
Pedro Saramago Goncalves ◽  
Rachel Churchill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Mental Health Interventions

Economic evaluations of mental health interventions: A systematic review of interventions with work-focused components

2020 ◽  
Vol 132 ◽  
pp. 104982
Author(s):  
Aurélie Gaillard ◽  
Hélène Sultan-Taïeb ◽  
Chantal Sylvain ◽  
Marie-José Durand
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Mental Health Interventions
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document