Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Synthesis of the Evidence on What Works for Whom in Telemental Health: Rapid Realist Review.
Schlief, Merle; Saunders, Katherine R K; Appleton, Rebecca; Barnett, Phoebe; Vera San Juan, Norha; Foye, Una; Olive, Rachel Rowan; Machin, Karen; Shah, Prisha; Chipp, Beverley; Lyons, Natasha; Tamworth, Camilla; Persaud, Karen; Badhan, Monika; Black, Carrie-Ann; Sin, Jacqueline; Riches, Simon; Graham, Tom; Greening, Jeremy; Pirani, Farida; Griffiths, Raza; Jeynes, Tamar; McCabe, Rose; Lloyd-Evans, Brynmor; Simpson, Alan; Needle, Justin J; Trevillion, Kylee; Johnson, Sonia.
  • Schlief M; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Saunders KRK; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Appleton R; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Barnett P; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Vera San Juan N; Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Foye U; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Olive RR; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Machin K; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Shah P; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Chipp B; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Lyons N; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Tamworth C; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Persaud K; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Badhan M; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Black CA; Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Sin J; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Riches S; Centre for Mental Health Research, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Graham T; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Greening J; Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Pirani F; Social, Genetic & Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Griffiths R; Centre for Anxiety Disorders & Trauma, South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Jeynes T; Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • McCabe R; Psychological Medicine & Older Adult Directorate, South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
  • Lloyd-Evans B; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Simpson A; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Lived Experience Working Group, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Needle JJ; Centre for Mental Health Research, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Trevillion K; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Johnson S; NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Interact J Med Res ; 11(2): e38239, 2022 Sep 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054778
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Telemental health (delivering mental health care via video calls, telephone calls, or SMS text messages) is becoming increasingly widespread. Telemental health appears to be useful and effective in providing care to some service users in some settings, especially during an emergency restricting face-to-face contact, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, important limitations have been reported, and telemental health implementation risks the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities in service provision. If it is to be widely incorporated into routine care, a clear understanding is needed of when and for whom it is an acceptable and effective approach and when face-to-face care is needed.

OBJECTIVE:

This rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about which telemental health approaches work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms.

METHODS:

Rapid realist reviewing involves synthesizing relevant evidence and stakeholder expertise to allow timely development of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in areas where evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and practice. The CMO configurations encapsulate theories about what works for whom and by what mechanisms. Sources included eligible papers from 2 previous systematic reviews conducted by our team on telemental health; an updated search using the strategy from these reviews; a call for relevant evidence, including "gray literature," to the public and key experts; and website searches of relevant voluntary and statutory organizations. CMO configurations formulated from these sources were iteratively refined, including through discussions with an expert reference group, including researchers with relevant lived experience and frontline clinicians, and consultation with experts focused on three priority groups children and young people, users of inpatient and crisis care services, and digitally excluded groups.

RESULTS:

A total of 108 scientific and gray literature sources were included. From our initial CMO configurations, we derived 30 overarching CMO configurations within four domains connecting effectively; flexibility and personalization; safety, privacy, and confidentiality; and therapeutic quality and relationship. Reports and stakeholder input emphasized the importance of personal choice, privacy and safety, and therapeutic relationships in telemental health care. The review also identified particular service users likely to be disadvantaged by telemental health implementation and a need to ensure that face-to-face care of equivalent timeliness remains available. Mechanisms underlying the successful and unsuccessful application of telemental health are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS:

Service user choice, privacy and safety, the ability to connect effectively, and fostering strong therapeutic relationships need to be prioritized in delivering telemental health care. Guidelines and strategies coproduced with service users and frontline staff are needed to optimize telemental health implementation in real-world settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); CRD42021260910; https//www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260910.
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research / Randomized controlled trials / Reviews / Systematic review/Meta Analysis Language: English Journal: Interact J Med Res Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: 38239

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Qualitative research / Randomized controlled trials / Reviews / Systematic review/Meta Analysis Language: English Journal: Interact J Med Res Year: 2022 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: 38239