The Affiliated Brain Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2023 Feb 13;9:e43730. doi: 10.2196/43730.
After the rapid spread of the novel SARS-CoV-2, the short-term and long-term mental health impacts of the pandemic on the public, in particular on susceptible individuals, have been reported worldwide. Although digital mental health services expand accessibility while removing many barriers to in-person therapy, their usability, feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy require continued monitoring during the initial phase of the pandemic and its aftermath.
In this study, we aimed to understand what mental health services are offered, whether they are practical or acceptable, and to what extent digital mental health services are effective in response to the COVID-19 pandemic across high-income and low- and middle-income countries.
This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guideline. We implemented searches in PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases for studies that were published between December 2019 and November 2021 and that involved the use of digital mental health services. Two review authors screened, assessed, and extracted studies independently. The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.
This review identified 7506 articles through database searching. In total, 65 (0.9%) studies from 18 countries with 67,884 participants were eligible for the scoping review. Of the 65 studies, 16 (24.6%) were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 15 (23.1%) studies measured the usability; 31 (47.7%) studies evaluated the feasibility; 29 (44.6%) studies assessed the acceptability; and 51 (78.5%) studies assessed the efficacy. Web-based programs (21/65, 32.3%), videoconferencing platforms (16/65, 24.6%), smartphone apps (14/65, 21.5%), and SMS text messaging (5/65, 7.7%) were the main techniques. Psychotherapy (44/65, 67.7%) followed by psychoeducation (6/65, 9.2%) and psychological support (5/65, 7.7%) were commonly used. The results of the meta-analysis showed that digital mental health interventions were associated with a small reduction in depressive symptoms (standardized mean difference=-0.49; 95% CI -0.74 to -0.24; P<.001) and a moderate reduction in anxiety symptoms (standardized mean difference=-0.66; 95% CI -1.23 to -1.0; P=.02) significantly.
The findings suggest that digital mental health interventions may be practical and helpful for the general population, at-risk individuals, and patients with preexisting mental disorders across high-income and middle-income countries. An expanded research agenda is needed to apply different strategies for addressing diverse psychological needs and develop integrated mental health services in the post-COVID-19 era.
PROSPERO CRD42022307695; https://tinyurl.com/2jcuwjym.
新型 SARS-CoV-2 的迅速传播,全球范围内都报道了大流行对公众,尤其是对易感人群的短期和长期心理健康影响。尽管数字心理健康服务扩大了可及性,同时消除了许多面对面治疗的障碍,但在大流行初期及其后续阶段,仍需要继续监测其可用性、可行性、可接受性和疗效。
本研究旨在了解高收入和中低收入国家提供了哪些心理健康服务,它们是否实用或可接受,以及数字心理健康服务在应对 COVID-19 大流行方面的效果如何。
本研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南和扩展范围综述的 PRISMA 指南(PRISMA-ScR)。我们在 PubMed(医学文献在线数据库)、Embase、PsycINFO 和 Cochrane 数据库中进行了搜索,以查找 2019 年 12 月至 2021 年 11 月期间发表的涉及使用数字心理健康服务的研究。两名综述作者独立筛选、评估和提取研究。该方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册处注册。
通过数据库搜索,本研究共确定了 7506 篇文章。共有来自 18 个国家的 65 项(0.9%)研究,涉及 67884 名参与者,符合范围综述的条件。在 65 项研究中,有 16 项(24.6%)被纳入荟萃分析。共有 15 项(23.1%)研究测量了可用性;31 项(47.7%)研究评估了可行性;29 项(44.6%)研究评估了可接受性;51 项(78.5%)研究评估了疗效。网络程序(21/65,32.3%)、视频会议平台(16/65,24.6%)、智能手机应用程序(14/65,21.5%)和短信(5/65,7.7%)是主要技术。心理治疗(44/65,67.7%),其次是心理教育(6/65,9.2%)和心理支持(5/65,7.7%)。荟萃分析的结果表明,数字心理健康干预与抑郁症状的轻微减轻(标准化均数差=-0.49;95%CI-0.74 至-0.24;P<.001)和焦虑症状的中度减轻(标准化均数差=-0.66;95%CI-1.23 至-1.0;P=.02)显著相关。
研究结果表明,数字心理健康干预可能对高收入和中低收入国家的普通人群、高危人群和有先前精神障碍的患者具有实际帮助。在后 COVID-19 时代,需要制定一个扩展的研究议程,以应用不同的策略来满足不同的心理需求,并开发综合心理健康服务。
PROSPERO CRD42022307695;https://tinyurl.com/2jcuwjym。