Dataset Information

Stakeholders' views on online interventions to prevent common mental health disorders in adults implemented into existing healthcare systems in Europe.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Online preventive interventions can help to reduce the incidence of mental disorders. Whereas knowledge on stakeholders' attitudes and factors relevant for successfully integrating online treatment into existing healthcare systems is available, knowledge is scarce for online prevention.

Methods

Stakeholders from Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Spain were surveyed. Potential facilitators/delivery staff (e.g. psychologists, psychotherapists) completed an online questionnaire (n = 183), policy makers (i.e. from the governing sector or health insurance providers) participated in semi-structured interviews (n = 16) and target groups/potential users of mental illness prevention (n = 49) participated in ten focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to identify their experiences with and attitudes and needs regarding online programmes to prevent mental disorders. Additionally, it was examined which groups they consider underserved and which factors they consider as fostering and hindering for reach, adoption, implementation and maintenance (cf. RE-AIM model) when integrating online prevention into existing healthcare systems.

Results

Main advantages of online mental illness prevention are perceived in low structural and psychological barriers. Lack of personal contact, security, privacy and trust concerns were discussed as disadvantages. Relevant needs are high usability and target group appropriateness, evidence for effectiveness and the use of motivational tools.

Conclusions

Positive attitudes among stakeholders are the key for successful integration of online mental illness prevention into existing healthcare systems. Potential facilitators/delivery staff must receive training and support to implement these programmes; the programmes must be attractive and continuously evaluated, updated and promoted to ensure ongoing reach; and existing infrastructure and contextual factors must be considered.

SUBMITTER: Kuso S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8495679 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Stakeholders' views on online interventions to prevent common mental health disorders in adults implemented into existing healthcare systems in Europe.

Kuso Stefanie S Nitsch Martina M Zeiler Michael M Simek Monika M Adamcik Tanja T Dey Michelle M Berger Thomas T Krieger Tobias T Weisel Kiona K KK Zarski Anna-Carlotta AC Ebert David D DD Schaub Michael P MP Moser Christian T CT Botella Christina C Baños Rosa R Herrero Rocio R Etchemendy Ernestina E Nacke Barbara B Beintner Ina I Vollert Bianka B Schmidt-Hantke Juliane J Hütter Kristian K Jacobi Corinna C Waldherr Karin K

European journal of public health 20210701 31 Suppl 1

<h4>Background</h4>Online preventive interventions can help to reduce the incidence of mental disorders. Whereas knowledge on stakeholders' attitudes and factors relevant for successfully integrating online treatment into existing healthcare systems is available, knowledge is scarce for online prevention.<h4>Methods</h4>Stakeholders from Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Spain were surveyed. Potential facilitators/delivery staff (e.g. psychologists, psychotherapists) completed an online question ...[more]

PMID: 34240157

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMental health Applications (Mhealth Apps) can change how healthcare is delivered. However, very little is known about the efficacy of Mhealth Apps. Currently, only minimum guidance is available in Assessment and Evaluation Tools (AETs). Therefore, this project aims to understand AET developers' perspectives and end users' experiences and opinions on "how to choose a Mhealth App".ObjectiveThe primary objectives were: (1) obtaining stakeholder's opinions and experiences of development and use of AETs for Mhealth Apps, their weaknesses and strengths, and barriers in their implementation of Mhealth Apps; (2) the experiences of App users, their analyzation and, obstacles in the use of apps; and (3) to quantify themes related to choosing a Mhealth App.MethodsThis qualitative study, used a sampling method to recruit six stakeholders (one App developer, two AET developers, an individual with lived experience of mental health illness, and two physicians) who were interviewed using a topic guide. These were examined by researchers (CT, WK, & FN) using thematic content analysis. Additionally, an anonymous online survey of 107 individuals was conducted.FindingsOur analyses revealed six main themes: (a) needs and opportunities; (b) views on Mhealth apps; (c) views & opinions on AETs; (d) implementation barriers; (e) system of evaluation and; (f) future directions. The first key concept was, all stakeholders agreed that Apps could significantly impact mental health and that end-users were unaware of mental health AETs and Apps. Secondly, due to commercial interests, end-users reliability of App evaluations requires clear conflict-free guidelines. Thirdly, AETs should be evaluated and developed through a rigorous methodology. Finally, stakeholders shared insights into future developments for AETs and Mhealth Apps. Additionally, online survey respondents chose a "health professional" as their preferred source of guidance in selecting a Mhealth app (84%) and best suited to develop guidelines (70%).ConclusionThe interviews and survey highlight the need for Mhealth Apps to be regulated and the importance of health professionals' engagement in the implementation process. Similarly, without well-defined roles for App evaluations within the health care system, it is unlikely that AETs will have wider spread use and impact without risk.

Project description:BackgroundPatient navigation interventions (PNIs) can provide personalized support and promote appropriate coordination or continuation of health and social care services. Online PNIs have demonstrated excellent potential for improving patient knowledge, transition readiness, self-efficacy, and use of services. However, the characteristics (ie, intervention type, mode of delivery, duration, frequency, outcomes and outcome measures, underlying theories or mechanisms of change of the intervention, and impact) of existing online PNIs to support the health and social needs of individuals with illness remain unclear.ObjectiveThis scoping review of the existing literature aims to identify the characteristics of existing online PNIs reported in the literature.MethodsA scoping review based on the guidelines outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute framework was conducted. A search for peer-reviewed literature published between 1989 and 2022 on online PNIs was conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Library databases. Two independent reviewers conducted 2 levels of screening. Data abstraction was conducted to outline key study characteristics (eg, study design, population, and intervention characteristics). The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.ResultsA total of 100 studies met the inclusion criteria. Our findings indicate that a variety of study designs are used to describe and evaluate online PNIs, with literature being published between 2003 and 2022 in Western countries. Of these studies, 39 (39%) studies were randomized controlled trials. In addition, we noticed an increase in reported online PNIs since 2019. The majority of studies involved White females with a diagnosis of cancer and a lack of participants aged 70 years or older was observed. Most online PNIs provide support through navigation, self-management and lifestyle changes, counseling, coaching, education, or a combination of support. Variation was noted in terms of mode of delivery, duration, and frequency. Only a small number of studies described theoretical frameworks or change mechanisms to guide intervention.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first review to comprehensively synthesize the existing literature on online PNIs, by focusing on the characteristics of interventions and studies in this area. Inconsistency in reporting the country of publication, population characteristics, duration and frequency of interventions, and a lack of the use of underlying theories and working mechanisms to inform intervention development, provide guidance for the reporting of future online PNIs.

Project description:BackgroundThe access to healthcare and treatment by rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, particularly to biologics, differs significantly among European countries.We aimed to explore the views and experiences of Portuguese healthcare stakeholders on key barriers which limit the access to treatment, and ultimately to biologics, by RA patients and to find potential solutions (leverage points) to overcome the identified barriers.MethodsThis was a qualitative research consisting of semi-structured face-to-face interviews with key stakeholders in RA framework. Thirty four individuals from eight groups of stakeholders were interviewed: rural and urban general practitioners (GPs), rheumatologists, hospital managers, hospital pharmacists, budget holders, representatives from the Portuguese Rheumatology Society and the RA Patient Association. Interviews were conducted between May and June 2011. Conventional content analysis with research triangulation was used.ResultsThe key barriers identified were related to the accessibility to primary healthcare services, difficulties in RA diagnosis among GPs, inefficient referral to secondary healthcare and controlled process of biologics prescription in public hospitals. The leverage points identified included the improvement of epidemiological and clinical knowledge about RA in Portugal, a better understanding of the disease among patients and GPs, the clarification of biologics benefits among budget holders and a raised awareness of the current treatment guidelines. In order to further address the leverage points, the following key initiatives were proposed: optimization of RA national registry; dissemination of information on rheumatic symptoms in primary care facilities and among the general public; increase interaction between rheumatologists and GPs through clinical discussions of successfully treated patients or workshops; broader utilization of disease diagnosis and monitoring tools, such as DAS28, and implementation of hospital-based research to collect real-world data.ConclusionsMost of the key barriers limiting the access to treatment, including biologics, in RA in Portugal are upstream of rheumatology practice. Our findings suggest that future actions should be focused on the primary care level to improve referral to rheumatologists. In addition, the collection of real-world data seems essential to characterise the RA population, to improve disease management and to increase compliance with current treatment guidelines.

Project description:IntroductionArtificial intelligence (AI) offers great potential for transforming healthcare delivery leading to better patient-outcomes and more efficient care delivery. However, despite these advantages, integration of AI in healthcare has not kept pace with technological advancements. Previous research indicates the importance of understanding various organisational factors that shape integration of new technologies in healthcare. Therefore, the aim of this study is to provide an overview of the existing organisational factors influencing adoption of AI in healthcare from the perspectives of different relevant stakeholders. By conducting this review, the various organisational factors that facilitate or hinder AI implementation in healthcare could be identified.Methods and analysisThis study will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute framework, which includes the following stages: (1) defining and aligning objectives and questions, (2) developing and aligning the inclusions criteria with objectives and questions, (3) describing the planned approach to evidence searching and selection, (4) searching for the evidence, (5) selecting the evidence, (6) extracting the evidence, (7) charting the evidence, and summarising the evidence with regard to the objectives and questions.The databases searched will be MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (Plus), PubMed, Cohrane Library, Scopus, MathSciNet, NICE Evidence, OpenGrey, O'REILLY and Social Care Online from January 2000 to June 2021. Search results will be reported based on The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines. The review will adopt diffusion of innovations theory, technology acceptance model and stakeholder theory as guiding conceptual models. Narrative synthesis will be used to integrate the findings.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval will not be sought for this scoping review as it only includes information from previously published studies. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal. In addition, to ensure its findings reach relevant stakeholders, they will be presented at relevant conferences.

Project description:BackgroundPatients and the public have an integral role in educating healthcare professionals. Authentic partnerships between higher education institutions and patients and the public are essential. This study examined key stakeholders' views, experiences and expectations of patient and public involvement (PPI) including the nature of the involvement and requirements for partnership.MethodsPurposive and snowball sampling was used to recruit key stakeholders, including patients and members of the public involved in health professions education, and academics interested in PPI. Focus groups were held with patient and public participants, providing the opportunity to gain multiple perspectives in an interactive group setting. Academics with an interest in PPI were interviewed using a semi-structured approach. Topic guides were derived from the literature and piloted prior to data collection. Focus groups and interviews were conducted until data saturation was achieved. All data was audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and thematically analysed.ResultsFour focus groups were conducted involving 23 patient and public participants (median number of participants per focus group of 6). Nine interviews were conducted with academics (face-to-face [n = 8] or by telephone [n = 1]). Five themes were developed: previous experiences of PPI, training requirements, challenges/barriers to PPI, facilitators of PPI and future ideas for PPI. All participants held positive views of the value of PPI. Participants had mixed views in terms of training, which depended on the level of involvement, but similar views on the challenges and facilitators for PPI in education. There was agreement that PPI requires institutional vision and investment to build strong relationships and a culture of PPI best practice.ConclusionsThere is a need for more strategic and formal involvement of patients and the public to ensure that that PPI becomes sustainably embedded in health professions education.

Dataset Information

Stakeholders' views on online interventions to prevent common mental health disorders in adults implemented into existing healthcare systems in Europe.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Stakeholders' views on online interventions to prevent common mental health disorders in adults implemented into existing healthcare systems in Europe.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets