Mendes-Santos Cristina, Weiderpass Elisabete, Santana Rui, Andersson Gerhard
Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
NOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
JMIR Ment Health. 2020 Apr 6;7(4):e16817. doi: 10.2196/16817.
Despite the significant body of evidence on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of internet interventions, the implementation of such programs in Portugal is virtually non-existent. In addition, Portuguese psychologists' use and their attitudes towards such interventions is largely unknown.
The aim of this study was to explore Portuguese psychologists' knowledge, training, use and attitudes towards internet interventions; to investigate perceived advantages and limitations of such interventions; identify potential drivers and barriers impacting implementation; and study potential factors associated to previous use and attitudes towards internet interventions.
An online cross-sectional survey was developed by the authors and disseminated by the Portuguese Psychologists Association to its members.
A total of 1077 members of the Portuguese Psychologists Association responded to the questionnaire between November 2018 and February 2019. Of these, 37.2% (N=363) were familiar with internet interventions and 19.2% (N=188) considered having the necessary training to work within the field. 29.6% (N=319) of participants reported to have used some form of digital technology to deliver care in the past. Telephone (23.8%; N=256), e-mail (16.2%; N=175) and SMS (16.1%; N=173) services were among the most adopted forms of digital technology, while guided (1.3%; N=14) and unguided (1.5%; N=16) internet interventions were rarely used. Accessibility (79.9%; N=860), convenience (45.7%; N=492) and cost-effectiveness (45.5%; N=490) were considered the most important advantages of internet interventions. Conversely, ethical concerns (40.7%; N=438), client's ICT illiteracy (43.2%; N=465) and negative attitudes towards internet interventions (37%; N=398) were identified as the main limitations. An assessment of participants attitudes towards internet interventions revealed a slightly negative/neutral stance (Median=46.21; SD=15.06) and revealed greater acceptability towards blended treatment interventions (62.9%; N=615) when compared to standalone internet interventions (18.6%; N=181). Significant associations were found between knowledge (χ=90.4; P<.001), training (χ=94.6; P<.001), attitudes (χ=38.4; P<.001) and previous use of internet interventions and between knowledge (χ=109.7; P<.001), training (χ=64.7; P<.001) and attitudes towards such interventions, with psychologists reporting to be ignorant and not having adequate training in the field, being more likely to present more negative attitudes towards these interventions and not having prior experience in its implementation.
This study revealed that most Portuguese psychologists are not familiar with and have no training or prior experience using internet interventions and had a slightly negative/neutral attitude towards such interventions. There was greater acceptability towards blended treatment interventions compared to standalone internet interventions. Lack of knowledge and training were identified as the main barriers to overcome, underlining the need of promoting awareness and training initiatives to ensure internet interventions successful implementation.
尽管有大量证据表明网络干预措施具有有效性和成本效益,但此类项目在葡萄牙几乎没有实施。此外,葡萄牙心理学家对此类干预措施的使用情况及其态度在很大程度上尚不明确。
本研究旨在探讨葡萄牙心理学家对网络干预措施的了解、培训、使用情况及态度;调查此类干预措施的感知优势和局限性;确定影响实施的潜在驱动因素和障碍;并研究与先前使用网络干预措施及态度相关的潜在因素。
作者设计了一项在线横断面调查,并由葡萄牙心理学家协会向其成员进行分发。
在2018年11月至2019年2月期间,共有1077名葡萄牙心理学家协会成员回复了问卷。其中,37.2%(N = 363)熟悉网络干预措施,19.2%(N = 188)认为自己具备在该领域工作所需的培训。29.6%(N = 319)的参与者报告称过去曾使用某种形式的数字技术提供护理。电话(23.8%;N = 256)、电子邮件(16.2%;N = 175)和短信(16.1%;N = 173)服务是最常采用的数字技术形式,而有指导的(1.3%;N = 14)和无指导的(1.5%;N = 16)网络干预措施很少被使用。可及性(79.9%;N = 860)、便利性(45.7%;N = 492)和成本效益(45.5%;N = 490)被认为是网络干预措施最重要的优势。相反,伦理问题(40.7%;N = 438)、服务对象的信息通信技术文盲问题(43.2%;N = 465)以及对网络干预措施的负面态度(37%;N = 398)被确定为主要局限性。对参与者对网络干预措施态度的评估显示出略微消极/中立的立场(中位数 = 46.21;标准差 = 15.06),并且与单独的网络干预措施(18.6%;N = 181)相比,对混合治疗干预措施的接受度更高(62.9%;N = 615)。在对网络干预措施的了解(χ = 90.4;P <.001)、培训(χ = 94.6;P <.001)、态度(χ = 38.4;P <.001)与先前使用情况之间,以及在了解(χ = 109.7;P <.001)、培训(χ = 64.7;P <.001)与对这些干预措施的态度之间发现了显著关联,心理学家报告称在该领域无知且没有足够的培训,更有可能对这些干预措施表现出更消极的态度且没有实施此类措施的先前经验。
本研究表明,大多数葡萄牙心理学家不熟悉网络干预措施,没有使用网络干预措施的培训或先前经验,并且对此类干预措施持略微消极/中立的态度。与单独的网络干预措施相比,对混合治疗干预措施的接受度更高。缺乏知识和培训被确定为需要克服的主要障碍,这突出了提高认识和开展培训举措以确保网络干预措施成功实施的必要性。