ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has played a vital role in providing psychiatric treatment to patients during the rapid transition of services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, the use of telemedicine is expected to expand within the psychiatric field. The efficacy of telemedicine is well described in scientific literature. However, there is a need for a comprehensive quantitative review that analyzes and considers the different clinical outcomes and psychiatric diagnoses. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to assess whether individual psychiatric outpatient treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder, mood disorders, and anxiety disorders in adults using telemedicine is equivalent to in-person treatment. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized controlled trials was conducted using recognized databases for this review. Overall, 4 outcomes were assessed: treatment efficacy, levels of patient satisfaction, working alliance, and attrition rate. The inverse-variance method was used to summarize the effect size for each outcome. RESULTS: A total of 7414 records were identified, and 20 trials were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The trials included posttraumatic stress disorder (9 trials), depressive disorder (6 trials), a mix of different disorders (4 trials), and general anxiety disorder (1 trial). Overall, the analyses yielded evidence that telemedicine is comparable with in-person treatment regarding treatment efficacy (standardized mean difference -0.01, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.09; P=.84; I2=19%, 17 trials, n=1814), patient satisfaction mean difference (-0.66, 95% CI -1.60 to 0.28; P=.17; I2=44%, 6 trials, n=591), and attrition rates (risk ratio 1.07, 95% CI 0.94-1.21; P=.32; I2=0%, 20 trials, n=2804). The results also indicated that the working alliance between telemedicine and in-person modalities was comparable, but the heterogeneity was substantial to considerable (mean difference 0.95, 95% CI -0.47 to 2.38; P=.19; I2=75%, 6 trials, n=539). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provided new knowledge on individual telemedicine interventions that were considered equivalent to in-person treatment regarding efficacy, patient satisfaction, working alliance, and attrition rates across diagnoses. The certainty of the evidence regarding efficacy was rated as moderate. Furthermore, high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to strengthen the evidence base for treatment provided via telemedicine in psychiatry, particularly for personality disorders and a range of anxiety disorders where there is a lack of studies. Individual patient data meta-analysis is suggested for future studies to personalize telemedicine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021256357; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=256357.
ABSTRACT
Eating disorders are more prevalent in athletes than in the general population and may have severe consequences for sports performance and health. Identifying symptoms can be difficult in athletes because restrictive eating and slim body images are often idealised in a sports setting. The Eating Disorders Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) and the SCOFF (Sick, Control, One stone, Fat and Food) questionnaire (SCOFF) are widely used generic instruments to identify symptoms of eating disorders. This study aimed to investigate the instruments' validity and explore eating disorder symptoms in a sample of athletes. A sample of 28 athletes (25 females) competing at a national level was interviewed based on the diagnostic criteria for eating disorders. We interviewed 18 athletes with a high score on EDE-Q and 10 with a low score. All interviews were transcribed and analysed from a general inductive approach. We identified 20 athletes with an eating disorder diagnosis, while 8 had no diagnosis. EDE-Q found 90% of the cases, while SCOFF found 94%. EDE-Q found no false-positive cases, while SCOFF found one. The qualitative results showed that most athletes reported eating concerns, restrictive eating, eating control (counting calories), weight concerns, body dissatisfaction (feeling fat and non-athletic), excessive exercise and health problems (eg, pain, fatigue). In conclusion, EDE-Q and SCOFF seem valid instruments to screen athletes' samples but may fail to find 6%-10% cases with eating disorders. Despite athletic bodies and normal body mass index, many athletes report severe eating problems and dissatisfaction with weight and body appearance. Implementation of regular screening may identify these symptoms at an early stage.