Suppr超能文献

用于儿童和青少年焦虑症及抑郁症的电子心理健康护理技术:报告实施结果的研究系统综述

eMental Healthcare Technologies for Anxiety and Depression in Childhood and Adolescence: Systematic Review of Studies Reporting Implementation Outcomes.

作者信息

Wozney Lori, McGrath Patrick J, Gehring Nicole D, Bennett Kathryn, Huguet Anna, Hartling Lisa, Dyson Michele P, Soleimani Amir, Newton Amanda S

机构信息

Izaak Walton Killam Centre, Centre for Research in Family Health, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Department of Psychiatry, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

出版信息

JMIR Ment Health. 2018 Jun 26;5(2):e48. doi: 10.2196/mental.9655.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Anxiety disorders and depression are frequent conditions in childhood and adolescence. eMental healthcare technologies may improve access to services, but their uptake within health systems is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to examine and describe how the implementation of eMental healthcare technologies for anxiety disorders and depression in children and adolescents has been studied.

METHODS

We conducted a search of 5 electronic databases and gray literature. Eligible studies were those that assessed an eMental healthcare technology for treating or preventing anxiety or depression, included children or adolescents (<18 years), or their parents or healthcare providers and reported findings on technology implementation. The methodological quality of studies was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Outcomes of interest were based on 8 implementation outcomes: acceptability (satisfaction with a technology), adoption (technology uptake and utilization), appropriateness ("fitness for purpose"), cost (financial impact of technology implementation), feasibility (extent to which a technology was successfully used), fidelity (implementation as intended), penetration ("spread" or "reach" of the technology), and sustainability (maintenance or integration of a technology within a healthcare service). For extracted implementation outcome data, we coded favorable ratings on measurement scales as "positive results" and unfavorable ratings on measurement scales as "negative results." Those studies that reported both positive and negative findings were coded as having "mixed results."

RESULTS

A total of 46 studies met the inclusion criteria, the majority of which were rated as very good to excellent in methodological quality. These studies investigated eMental healthcare technologies for anxiety (n=23), depression (n=18), or both anxiety and depression (n=5). Studies of technologies for anxiety evaluated the following: (1) acceptability (78%) reported high levels of satisfaction, (2) adoption (43%) commonly reported positive results, and (3) feasibility (43%) reported mixed results. Studies of technologies for depression evaluated the following: (1) appropriateness (56%) reported moderate helpfulness and (2) acceptability (50%) described a mix of both positive and negative findings. Studies of technologies designed to aid anxiety and depression commonly reported mixed experiences with acceptability and adoption and positive findings for appropriateness of the technologies for treatment. Across all studies, cost, fidelity, and penetration and sustainability were the least measured implementation outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptability of eMental healthcare technology is high among users and is the most commonly investigated implementation outcome. Perceptions of the appropriateness and adoption of eMental healthcare technology were varied. Implementation research that identifies, evaluates, and reports on costs, sustainability, and fidelity to clinical guidelines is crucial for making high-quality eMental healthcare available to children and adolescents.

摘要

背景

焦虑症和抑郁症在儿童和青少年中很常见。电子心理健康护理技术可能会改善服务的可及性,但它们在卫生系统中的应用有限。

目的

本综述的目的是研究和描述针对儿童和青少年焦虑症和抑郁症的电子心理健康护理技术的实施情况。

方法

我们检索了5个电子数据库和灰色文献。符合条件的研究是那些评估用于治疗或预防焦虑或抑郁的电子心理健康护理技术的研究,包括儿童或青少年(<18岁)、他们的父母或医疗保健提供者,并报告了技术实施的结果。使用混合方法评估工具评估研究的方法学质量。感兴趣的结果基于8个实施结果:可接受性(对技术的满意度)、采用率(技术的采用和使用情况)、适宜性(“是否适合目的”)、成本(技术实施的财务影响)、可行性(技术成功使用的程度)、保真度(按预期实施)、渗透率(技术的“传播”或“覆盖范围”)和可持续性(技术在医疗服务中的维持或整合)。对于提取的实施结果数据,我们将量表上的有利评级编码为“阳性结果”,将量表上的不利评级编码为“阴性结果”。那些报告了阳性和阴性结果的研究被编码为“混合结果”。

结果

共有46项研究符合纳入标准,其中大多数在方法学质量上被评为非常好到优秀。这些研究调查了用于治疗焦虑症(n = 23)、抑郁症(n = 18)或焦虑症和抑郁症两者(n = 5)的电子心理健康护理技术。针对焦虑症的技术研究评估了以下方面:(1)可接受性(78%)报告了高水平的满意度,(2)采用率(43%)通常报告了阳性结果,(3)可行性(43%)报告了混合结果。针对抑郁症的技术研究评估了以下方面:(1)适宜性(56%)报告了中等帮助程度,(2)可接受性(50%)描述了阳性和阴性结果的混合。旨在帮助焦虑症和抑郁症的技术研究通常报告了在可接受性和采用率方面的混合体验以及该技术用于治疗的适宜性方面的阳性结果。在所有研究中,成本、保真度、渗透率和可持续性是最少测量的实施结果。

结论

电子心理健康护理技术在用户中的可接受性很高,并且是最常研究的实施结果。对电子心理健康护理技术的适宜性和采用率的看法各不相同。识别、评估和报告成本、可持续性以及对临床指南的保真度的实施研究对于为儿童和青少年提供高质量的电子心理健康护理至关重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/65a1/6039769/01adcc358bf8/mental_v5i2e48_fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验