Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review (preprint)

Background The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid shift from traditional face-to-face care provision towards delivering mental health care remotely through telecommunications, often referred to as telemental health care. However, the manner and extent of telemental health implementation have varied considerably across settings and areas, and substantial barriers are encountered. There is, therefore, now a need to identify what works best for service users and staff and establish the key mechanisms for efficient integration into routine care. Objective We aimed to identify investigations of pre-planned strategies intended to achieve or improve effective and sustained implementation of telemental health approaches, and to evaluate how different strategies influence implementation outcomes. Methods A systematic review was conducted, with five databases searched for relevant literature using any methodological approach, published between January 2010 and July 2021. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they took place in secondary or tertiary mental health services and focused on pre-planned strategies for achieving or improving delivery of mental health care through remote communication between mental health professionals or between mental health professionals and service users, family members, unpaid carers, or peer supporters. All included studies were assessed for risk of bias. Data were synthesised using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation of implementation strategies and the taxonomy of implementation outcomes. Results A total of 14 studies were identified which met the inclusion criteria. A variety of implementation strategies were identified, the most commonly reported being ‘Train and educate stakeholders’. All studies reported using a combination of several implementation strategies. Conclusions Using a combination of implementation strategies appears to be a helpful method of supporting the implementation of telemental health. Further research is needed to test the impact of specific implementation strategies on implementation outcomes.

What has changed in the experiences of people with mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic? Findings from follow-up interviews using a coproduced, participatory qualitative approach (preprint)

PurposeWe sought to understand how the experiences of people in the UK with pre-existing mental health conditions had developed during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. MethodsIn September-October 2020 we interviewed adults with mental health conditions pre-dating the pandemic, whom we had previously interviewed three months earlier. Participants had been recruited through online advertising and voluntary sector community organisations. Interviews were conducted by telephone or video-conference by researchers with lived experience of mental health difficulties, and explored changes over time in peoples experience of the pandemic. ResultsWe interviewed 44 people, achieving diversity of demographic characteristics and a range of mental health conditions and service use among our sample. Three overarching themes were derived from interviews. The first theme "Spectrum of adaptation": to difficulties in access to, or the quality of, statutory mental health services, through developing new personal coping strategies or identifying alternative sources of support. The second theme is "Accumulating pressures": from pandemic-related anxieties and sustained disruption to social contact and support, and to mental health treatment. The third theme "Feeling overlooked": A sense of people with pre-existing mental health conditions being overlooked during the pandemic by policy-makers at all levels. The latter was compounded for people from ethnic minority communities or with physical health problems. ConclusionOur study highlights the need to support marginalised groups who are at risk of increased inequalities, and to maintain crucial mental and physical healthcare and social care for people with existing mental health conditions, notwithstanding challenges of the pandemic.

Implementation, adoption and perceptions of telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review (preprint)

Background: Early in 2020, mental health services had to rapidly shift from face-to-face models of care to delivering the majority of treatments remotely (by video or phone call or occasionally messaging) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This resulted in several challenges for staff and patients, but also in benefits such as convenience or increased access for people with impaired mobility or in rural areas. There is a need to understand the extent and impacts of telemental health implementation, and barriers and facilitators to its effective and acceptable use. This is relevant both to future emergency adoption of telemental health, and to debates on its future use in routine mental health care. Objective: To investigate the adoption and impacts of telemental health approaches during the COVID-19 Pandemic, and facilitators and barriers to optimal implementation. Methods: Four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science) were searched for primary research relating to remote working, mental health care, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Preprint servers were also searched. Results of studies were synthesised using framework synthesis. Results: A total of 77 papers met our inclusion criteria. In most studies, the majority of contacts could be transferred to a remote form during the pandemic, and good acceptability to service users and clinicians tended to be reported, at least where the alternative to remote contacts was interrupting care. However, a range of impediments to dealing optimal care by this means were also identified. Conclusions: Implementation of telemental health allowed some continuing support to the majority of service users during the COVID-19 pandemic and has value in an emergency situation. However, not all service users can be reached by this means, and better evidence is now needed on long-term impacts on therapeutic relationships and quality of care, and on impacts on groups at risk of digital exclusion and how to mitigate these.

Service user experiences and views regarding telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a co-produced framework analysis (preprint)

BackgroundThe prominence of telemental health, including providing care by video call and telephone, has greatly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are clear variations in uptake and acceptability, and concerns that digital exclusion may exacerbate previous inequalities in accessing good quality care. Greater understanding is needed of how service users experience telemental health, and what determines whether they engage and find it acceptable. MethodsWe conducted a collaborative framework analysis of data from semi-structured interviews with a sample of people already experiencing mental health problems prior to the pandemic. Data relevant to participants experiences and views regarding telemental health during the pandemic was identified and extracted. Data collection and analysis used a participatory, coproduction approach where lived experience researchers, clinical and academic researchers contributed to all stages of data collection, analysis and interpretation of findings. FindingsParticipants experiences and preferences regarding telemental health care were dynamic and varied across time, settings, and individuals. Participants preferences were shaped by the reason for contacting providers, their relationship with the care provider, and both parties access or acceptability to use remote technology. While face-to-face care tended to be the preferred option, participants identified benefits of remote care including making care more accessible for some populations and improved efficiency for functional appointments such as prescription reviews. Participants highlighted important new challenges around safety and privacy in online settings, and gave examples of good remote care strategies, including scheduling regular phone calls and developing guidelines about how to access remote care tools. DiscussionParticipants in our study and previous literature have highlighted advantages of telemental health care, as well as significant limitations which hinder mental health support and exacerbate inequalities in access to services. Some of these limitations are seen as potentially removable, for example through staff training or better digital access for staff or service users. Others indicate a need to maintain traditional face-to-face contact at least for some appointments. There is a clear need for care to be flexible and individualised to service user circumstances and preferences. Further research is needed on ways of minimising digital exclusion and to support staff in making effective and collaborative use of relevant technologies.

Impact on mental health care and on mental health service users of the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods survey of UK mental health care staff (preprint)

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has potential to disrupt and burden the mental health care system, and to magnify inequalities experienced by mental health service users. MethodsWe investigated staff reports regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in its early weeks on mental health care and mental health service users in the UK using a mixed methods online survey. Recruitment channels included professional associations and networks, charities and social media. Quantitative findings were reported with descriptive statistics, and content analysis conducted for qualitative data. Results2,180 staff from a range of sectors, professions and specialties participated. Immediate infection control concerns were highly salient for inpatient staff, new ways of working for community staff. Multiple rapid adaptations and innovations in response to the crisis were described, especially remote working. This was cautiously welcomed but found successful in only some clinical situations. Staff had specific concerns about many groups of service users, including people whose conditions are exacerbated by pandemic anxieties and social disruptions; people experiencing loneliness, domestic abuse and family conflict; those unable to understand and follow social distancing requirements; and those who cannot engage with remote care. ConclusionThis overview of staff concerns and experiences in the early COVID-19 pandemic suggests directions for further research and service development: we suggest that how to combine infection control and a therapeutic environment in hospital, and how to achieve effective and targeted tele-health implementation in the community, should be priorities. The limitations of our convenience sample must be noted.