The Preference for Internet-Based Psychological Interventions by Individuals Without Past or Current Use of Mental Health Treatment Delivered Online: A Survey Study With Mixed-Methods Analysis

Emma Emmett Karolina Wallin, Susanne Mattsson, Erik Martin Gustaf Olsson, Emma Emmett Karolina Wallin, Susanne Mattsson, Erik Martin Gustaf Olsson

Abstract

Background: The use of the Internet has the potential to increase access to evidence-based mental health services for a far-reaching population at a low cost. However, low take-up rates in routine care indicate that barriers for implementing Internet-based interventions have not yet been fully identified.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the preference for Internet-based psychological interventions as compared to treatment delivered face to face among individuals without past or current use of mental health treatment delivered online. A further aim was to investigate predictors of treatment preference and to complement the quantitative analyses with qualitative data about the perceived advantages and disadvantages of Internet-based interventions.

Methods: Two convenience samples were used. Sample 1 was recruited in an occupational setting (n=231) and Sample 2 consisted of individuals previously treated for cancer (n=208). Data were collected using a paper-and-pencil survey and analyzed using mixed methods.

Results: The preference for Internet-based psychological interventions was low in both Sample 1 (6.5%) and Sample 2 (2.6%). Most participants preferred psychological interventions delivered face to face. Use of the Internet to search for and read health-related information was a significant predictor of treatment preference in both Sample 1 (odds ratio [OR] 2.82, 95% CI 1.18-6.75) and Sample 2 (OR 3.52, 95% CI 1.33-9.29). Being born outside of Sweden was a significant predictor of preference for Internet-based interventions, but only in Sample 2 (OR 6.24, 95% CI 1.29-30.16). Similar advantages and disadvantages were mentioned in both samples. Perceived advantages of Internet-based interventions included flexibility regarding time and location, low effort, accessibility, anonymity, credibility, user empowerment, and improved communication between therapist and client. Perceived disadvantages included anonymity, low credibility, impoverished communication between therapist and client, fear of negative side effects, requirements of computer literacy, and concerns about confidentiality.

Conclusions: Internet-based interventions were reported as the preferred choice by a minority of participants. The results suggest that Internet-based interventions have specific advantages that may facilitate help-seeking among some individuals and some disadvantages that may restrict its use. Initiatives to increase treatment acceptability may benefit from addressing the advantages and disadvantages reported in this study.

Keywords: Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy; chronic disease; eHealth; implementation; mental health care; patient acceptance of health care; patient preference; patient satisfaction; qualitative research.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

References

    1. Shidhaye R, Lund C, Chisholm D. Closing the treatment gap for mental, neurological and substance use disorders by strengthening existing health care platforms: Strategies for delivery and integration of evidence-based interventions. Int J Ment Health Syst. 2015;9:40. doi: 10.1186/s13033-015-0031-9.
    1. van Gemert-Pijnen JE, Nijland N, van Limburg M, Ossebaard HC, Kelders SM, Eysenbach G, Seydel ER. A holistic framework to improve the uptake and impact of eHealth technologies. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e111. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1672.
    1. Marks IM, Cavanagh K, Gega L. Computer-aided psychotherapy: Revolution or bubble? Br J Psychiatry. 2007 Dec;191:471–473. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.107.041152.
    1. Hedman E, Ljótsson B, Lindefors N. Cognitive behavior therapy via the Internet: A systematic review of applications, clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2012 Dec;12(6):745–764. doi: 10.1586/erp.12.67.
    1. Andrews G, Cuijpers P, Craske M, McEvoy P, Titov N. Computer therapy for the anxiety and depressive disorders is effective, acceptable and practical health care: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2010;5(10):e13196. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013196.
    1. van Beugen S, Ferwerda M, Hoeve D, Rovers MM, Spillekom-van Koulil S, van Middendorp H, Evers AW. Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy for patients with chronic somatic conditions: A meta-analytic review. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(3):e88. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2777.
    1. Whitfield G, Williams C. If the evidence is so good - why doesn't anyone use them? A national survey of the use of computerized cognitive behaviour therapy. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2004 Jan;32(1):57–65. doi: 10.1017/S1352465804001031.
    1. Kazdin A. Acceptability of alternative treatments for deviant child behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1980;13(2):259–273. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1980.13-259.
    1. Santana L, Fontenelle LF. A review of studies concerning treatment adherence of patients with anxiety disorders. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2011;5:427–439. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S23439.
    1. Swift JK, Callahan JL. The impact of client treatment preferences on outcome: A meta-analysis. J Clin Psychol. 2009 Apr;65(4):368–381. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20553.
    1. Arnberg F, Linton S, Hultcrantz M, Heintz E, Jonsson U. Internet-delivered psychological treatments for mood and anxiety disorders: A systematic review of their efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e98118. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098118.
    1. Griffiths F, Lindenmeyer A, Powell J, Lowe P, Thorogood M. Why are health care interventions delivered over the Internet? A systematic review of the published literature. J Med Internet Res. 2006;8(2):e10. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.2.e10.
    1. Beattie A, Shaw A, Kaur S, Kessler D. Primary-care patients' expectations and experiences of online cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: A qualitative study. Health Expect. 2009 Mar;12(1):45–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00531.x.
    1. Valaitis RK, Sword WA. Online discussions with pregnant and parenting adolescents: Perspectives and possibilities. Health Promot Pract. 2005 Oct;6(4):464–471. doi: 10.1177/1524839904263897.
    1. Kaltenthaler E, Sutcliffe P, Parry G, Beverley C, Rees A, Ferriter M. The acceptability to patients of computerized cognitive behaviour therapy for depression: A systematic review. Psychol Med. 2008 Nov;38(11):1521–1530. doi: 10.1017/S0033291707002607.
    1. Young KS. An empirical examination of client attitudes towards online counseling. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005 Apr;8(2):172–177. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.172.
    1. Waller R, Gilbody S. Barriers to the uptake of computerized cognitive behavioural therapy: A systematic review of the quantitative and qualitative evidence. Psychol Med. 2009 May;39(5):705–712. doi: 10.1017/S0033291708004224.
    1. Mohr DC, Siddique J, Ho J, Duffecy J, Jin L, Fokuo JK. Interest in behavioral and psychological treatments delivered face-to-face, by telephone, and by Internet. Ann Behav Med. 2010 Aug;40(1):89–98. doi: 10.1007/s12160-010-9203-7.
    1. Musiat P, Goldstone P, Tarrier N. Understanding the acceptability of e-mental health--Attitudes and expectations towards computerised self-help treatments for mental health problems. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14:109. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-14-109.
    1. Bennett G, Glasgow R. The delivery of public health interventions via the Internet: Actualizing their potential. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:273–292. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100235.
    1. Whitehead LC. Methodological and ethical issues in Internet-mediated research in the field of health: An integrated review of the literature. Soc Sci Med. 2007 Aug;65(4):782–791. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.03.005.
    1. Murray E, Burns J, See TS, Lai R, Nazareth I. Interactive health communication applications for people with chronic disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(4):CD004274. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004274.pub4.
    1. Bouma G, Admiraal JM, de Vries EG, Schröder CP, Walenkamp AM, Reyners AK. Internet-based support programs to alleviate psychosocial and physical symptoms in cancer patients: A literature analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2015 Jul;95(1):26–37. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2015.01.011.
    1. Mattsson S, Olsson EM, Alfonsson S, Johansson B, Carlsson M. Measuring use of health-related support on the Internet: Development of the Health Online Support Questionnaire (HOSQ) J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(11):e266. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4425.
    1. Iacobucci D, Posavac S, Kardes F, Schneider M, Popovich D. Toward a more nuanced understanding of the statistical properties of a median split. J Consum Psychol. 2015 Oct;25(4):652–665. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.12.002.
    1. Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(1):107–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.
    1. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004 Feb;24(2):105–112. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.
    1. Musiat P, Tarrier N. Collateral outcomes in e-mental health: A systematic review of the evidence for added benefits of computerized cognitive behavior therapy interventions for mental health. Psychol Med. 2014 Nov;44(15):3137–3150. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714000245.
    1. Clement S, Schauman O, Graham T, Maggioni F, Evans-Lacko S, Bezborodovs N, Morgan C, Rüsch N, Brown JS, Thornicroft G. What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. Psychol Med. 2015 Jan;45(1):11–27. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714000129.
    1. Simmonds B, Turner N, Thomas L, Campbell J, Lewis G, Wiles N, Turner K. Patients' experiences of participating in a large-scale trial of cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: A mixed methods study. Fam Pract. 2013 Dec;30(6):705–711. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmt028.
    1. Rozental A, Boettcher J, Andersson G, Schmidt B, Carlbring P. Negative effects of Internet interventions: A qualitative content analysis of patients' experiences with treatments delivered online. Cogn Behav Ther. 2015;44(3):223–236. doi: 10.1080/16506073.2015.1008033.
    1. Wentzel J, van der Vaart R, Bohlmeijer ET, van Gemert-Pijnen JE. Mixing online and face-to-face therapy: How to benefit from blended care in mental health care. JMIR Ment Health. 2016;3(1):e9. doi: 10.2196/mental.4534.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere