Therapeutic Factors and Member Satisfaction in an Online Group Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate members' perceptions of the therapeutic factors during a group intervention that was designed to mitigate the adverse psychological effects of the coronavirus pandemic and the imposition of restrictive measures, their satisfaction with the online format of the intervention, and how these are associated with the intervention's outcomes. The participants (N = 44, M age = 31.93, SD = 8.09) were Greek adults who attended a 2-week, voluntary, online group intervention. To assess the effectiveness of the intervention, 1 week before and 1 week after implementation, participants completed several questionnaires measuring their demographic characteristics, empathy, resilience, affectivity, feelings of loneliness, depression and anxiety levels, and feelings of fear regarding the outbreak. One week after the intervention, they also completed two questionnaires evaluating the therapeutic factors and their satisfaction and impressions regarding telemental health counseling. Analyses showed that the most frequently cited therapeutic factor was guidance, followed by acceptance, self-disclosure, universality, and instillation of hope. Therapeutic factors of catharsis, self-disclosure, guidance, self-understanding, vicarious learning, and therapeutic alliance correlated with elements of empathy, resilience, loneliness, positive emotions, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and fear of the coronavirus. Satisfaction with the online format of the intervention was associated to universality, elements of empathy, and symptoms of depression. More specifically, member satisfaction was negatively correlated with improvement in personal distress and depression, an unexpected finding that may be attributed to the brief duration of the present intervention. The practical value of the results for the development and implementation of online psychological interventions during a crisis is discussed.

An International Survey of the Concept of Effective Psychodynamic Treatment During the Pandemic.

Introduction: Most psychotherapists had no choice during the COVID-19 pandemic but to offer teletherapy in order to provide needed treatment. Several psychoanalytic theorists wondered if the very concept of treatment would change without an embodied relationship in an office setting. Methods: To attempt to understand the current concept of effective psychodynamic treatment in the new norm of teletherapy, we surveyed practitioners from 56 countries and regions who remotely treated patients psychodynamically during the beginning months of the pandemic. We asked the practitioners to rank six factors felt to be important to psychodynamic treatment: use of the couch during sessions, session in-office or via teletherapy, cultural similarity between therapist and patient, number of sessions a week, patient factors (motivation, insightfulness, and high functioning) and therapist factors (empathy, warmth, wisdom, and skillfulness). Results: We received 1,490 survey responses. As predicted, we found that the therapist and patient variables were considered much more important (both tied as highest rankings) to effective treatment than any of the other variables, including if the therapy was in-office or by teletherapy. Discussion: Psychodynamic practitioners worldwide confirmed that the empathy, warmth, wisdom, and skillfulness of the therapist and the motivation, insightfulness, and level of functioning of the patient are most important to treatment effectiveness regardless if the treatment is remote or embodied.

Can occupational therapy manpower be replaced with social robots in a singing group during COVID-19?

BACKGROUND: Prior to the COVID-19 global health emergency, reducing direct contacts between therapists and patients is an important issue, and could be achieved by using robots to perform certain caring activities. OBJECTIVE: This study compares therapeutic factors of singing group activities directed by social robots and by occupational therapists at elderly care centers during this COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: This project has a quasi-experimental research design, based on a pilot study of 14 subjects aged above 65 years. They received eight sessions of singing group therapy given by a social robot or an occupational therapist. Completed copies of a therapeutic-factor questionnaire were then collected. RESULTS: At the 4th week, the scores for 8 therapeutic factors were higher in sessions with the occupational therapist than the robot-directed sessions, reaching a statistically significant level; at the 8th week, the scores for 3 therapeutic factors, including imparting of information, were higher in sessions with the occupational therapist than in sessions with the robot. The top scoring therapeutic factor in the robot sessions was group cohesiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Social robots may be good companion tools for elderly care during this COVID-19 outbreak, but group therapy sessions supervised by real-person therapists still have higher therapeutic factor scores than those conducted by robots. The number of subjects needs to be increased to enhance the validity of future study results.