Telehealth treatment of patients with major depressive disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic: Comparative safety, patient satisfaction, and effectiveness to prepandemic in-person treatment.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic impelled a transition from in-person to telehealth psychiatric treatment. There are no studies of partial hospital telehealth treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we compared the effectiveness of partial hospital care of patients with MDD treated virtually versus in-person. METHODS: Outcome was compared in 294 patients who were treated virtually from May 2020 to December 2021 to 542 patients who were treated in the in-person partial program in the 2 years prior to the pandemic. Patients completed self-administered measures of patient satisfaction, symptoms, coping ability, functioning, and general well-being. RESULTS: In both the in-person and telehealth groups, patients with MDD were highly satisfied with treatment and reported a significant reduction in symptoms from admission to discharge. Both groups also reported a significant improvement in positive mental health, general well-being, coping ability, and functioning. A large effect size of treatment was found in both treatment groups. Contrary to our hypothesis, the small differences in outcome favored the telehealth-treated patients. The length of stay and the likelihood of staying in treatment until completion were significantly greater in the virtually treated patients. LIMITATIONS: The treatment groups were ascertained sequentially, and telehealth treatment was initiated after the COVID-19 pandemic began. Outcome assessment was limited to a self-administered questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: In an intensive acute care setting, delivering treatment to patients with MDD using a virtual, telehealth platform was as effective as treating patients in-person.

Telehealth Treatment of Patients in an Intensive Acute Care Psychiatric Setting During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparative Safety and Effectiveness to In-Person Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Most research evaluating telehealth psychiatric treatment has been conducted in outpatient settings. There is a great lack of research assessing the efficacy of telehealth treatment in more acute, intensive treatment settings such as a partial hospital. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, much of behavioral health treatment has transitioned to a virtual format. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the effectiveness of our partial hospital program (PHP). METHOD: The sample included 207 patients who were treated virtually from May 2020 to September 2020 and a comparison group of 207 patients who were treated in the in-person partial program a year earlier. Patients completed self-administered measures of patient satisfaction, symptoms, coping ability, functioning, and general well-being. RESULTS: For both the in-person and telehealth methods of delivering partial hospital level of care, patients were highly satisfied with treatment and reported a significant reduction in symptoms and suicidality from admission to discharge. On the modified Remission from Depression Questionnaire, the primary outcome measure, both groups reported a significant (P < .01) improvement in functioning, coping ability, positive mental health, and general well-being. A large effect size of treatment (Cohen d > 0.8) was found in both treatment groups. The only significant difference in outcome between the patients treated in the different formats was a greater length of stay (mean ± SD of 13.5 ± 8.1 vs 8.5 ± 5.0 days, t = 7.61, P < .001) and greater likelihood of staying in treatment until completion (72.9% vs 62.3%, χ2 = 5.34, P < .05) in the virtually treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth partial hospital treatment was as effective as in-person treatment in terms of patient satisfaction, symptom reduction, suicidal ideation reduction, and improved functioning and well-being. The treatment completion rate was higher in the telehealth cohort, and several patients who were treated virtually commented that they never would have presented for in-person treatment even if there was no pandemic. Telehealth PHPs should be considered a viable treatment option even after the pandemic has resolved.

Telehealth Treatment of Patients With Borderline Personality Disorder in a Partial Hospital Setting During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparative Safety, Patient Satisfaction, and Effectiveness of In-Person Treatment.

There are no studies of the safety and effectiveness of telehealth psychiatric treatment of partial hospital level of care, in general, and for borderline personality disorder (BPD) in particular. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, the authors compared the effectiveness of their partial hospital treatment program in treating patients with BPD. For both the in-person and telehealth partial hospital level of care, patients with BPD were highly satisfied with treatment and reported a significant reduction in symptoms from admission to discharge. Both groups reported a significant improvement in functioning, coping ability, positive mental health, and general well-being. A large effect size of treatment was found in both treatment groups. No patients attempted suicide. Telehealth partial hospital treatment was as effective as in-person treatment in terms of patient satisfaction, symptom reduction, and improved functioning and well-being for patients with BPD.

Patient satisfaction with partial hospital telehealth treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: Comparison to in-person treatment.

Most research evaluating telehealth psychiatric treatment has been conducted in outpatient settings. There is a lack of research assessing the efficacy of telehealth treatment in more acute, intensive treatment settings such as a partial hospital. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, much of ambulatory behavioral health treatment has transitioned to a telehealth, or virtual, format. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we compared patient satisfaction of partial hospital services delivered via telehealth to in-person treatment provided to patients treated prior to the COVID-19 outbreak. The sample included 240 patients who were treated virtually from May, 2020 to October, 2020, and a comparison group of 240 patients who were treated in the in-person partial program a year earlier. Patients completed self-administered measures of patient satisfaction after the initial evaluation and at the end of treatment. For both the in-person and telehealth methods of delivering partial hospital level of care, patients were highly satisfied with the initial diagnostic evaluation and were optimistic at admission that treatment would be helpful. At the completion of treatment, both groups were highly satisfied with all components of the treatment program and almost all would recommend treatment to a friend or family member. Thus, patient satisfaction was as high with telehealth partial hospital treatment as with in-person treatment.