ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) are getting increasingly important for mental health care. In the case of eating disorders (EDs), DMHIs are still in early stages. Few studies so far investigated the views of mental health professionals for EDs on the integration of DMHIs in routine care. OBJECTIVE: To gain insights into the experiences, perspectives, and expectations of mental health professionals for EDs regarding DMHIs and to identify requirements for the future integration of DMHIs into routine care. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews with 24 German mental health professionals treating patients with EDs were conducted. A content analysis following a deductive-inductive approach asked for experiences, advantages and chances, disadvantages and boundaries, desired functions and properties, target groups, and general conditions and requirements for DMHIs for patients with EDs. RESULTS: Only few professionals reported experiences with DMHIs besides video-based psychotherapy during the pandemic. From the therapists' point of view, DMHIs have the potential to deliver low-threshold access for patients with EDs. Useful functionalities were seen in digital meal records, skills training, and psychoeducation. However, a stable therapeutic alliance was reported as an important prerequisite for the successful integration into care. Therapists expressed concerns in case of severe anorexia nervosa or suicidality. The participants felt to be informed inadequately on recent developments and on the evidence base of DMHIs. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health professionals for EDs show positive attitudes towards DMHIs, however many barriers to the integration in routine care were observed. The highest potential was seen for the use of DMHIs in addition to outpatient care and in aftercare. Specific requirements for DMHIs are related to different areas of the healthcare spectrum and for the different symptom profiles in anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder. Targeted DMHIs are needed and appropriate especially for concepts of blended care.
Digital mental health interventions are therapeutic services for people with a mental disorder that can be delivered on electronic devices. They are getting increasingly important, as many patients have to wait long for a therapy. In eating disorders these interventions are still in early stages. Twenty-four telephone interviews were held with German professionals treating adolescent and adult patients with eating disorders. The aim was to understand their experiences, perspectives, and expectations regarding digital mental health interventions and to find out what is needed to integrate them into care in the future. In general, the interview partners showed positive attitudes towards these interventions. However, only few reported experiences and many obstacles were observed. The highest potential was seen for the use in addition to care outside the hospital setting and after treatment has ended. However, in case of a severe eating disorder, such as anorexia, or self-harm and suicidality, they were against the use of digital interventions. A stable personal relationship to their patients was seen as particularly important before recommending a digital intervention. Finally, the interview partners felt not informed in a sufficient way on the scientific basis and regulations regarding digital mental health interventions.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic severely affected everyday life and working conditions for most Europeans, particularly health care professionals (HCPs). Over the past 3 years, various policies have been implemented in various European countries. Studies have reported on the worsening of mental health, work-related stress, and helpful coping strategies. However, having a closer look is still necessary to gain more information on the psychosocial stressors and unmet needs of HCPs as well as nonmedical staff. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to obtain quantitative information on job-related stressors of physicians and nurses and the coping strategies of HCPs and nonmedical staff at 2 periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. By further analyzing qualitative comments, we wanted to gain more information on the psychosocial stressors and unmet needs of HCPs as well as nonmedical staff on different levels of experience. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at 2 time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in several European countries. The first study period (T1) lasted between April 1 and June 20, 2020, and the second study period (T2) lasted between November 25, 2021, and February 28, 2022. On a quantitative level, we used a questionnaire on stressors for physicians and nurses and a questionnaire on coping strategies for HCPs and nonmedical staff. Quantitative data were descriptively analyzed for mean values and differences in stressors and coping strategies. Qualitative data of free-text boxes of HCPs and nonmedical staff were analyzed via thematic analysis to explore the experiences of the individuals. RESULTS: T1 comprised 609 participants, and T2 comprised 1398 participants. Overall, 296 participants made 438 qualitative comments. The uncertainty about when the pandemic would be controlled (T1: mean 2.28, SD 0.85; T2: mean 2.08, SD 0.90) and the fear of infecting the family (T1: mean 2.26, SD 0.98; T2: mean 2.02, SD 1.02) were the most severe stressors identified by physicians and nurses in both periods. Overall, the use of protective measures (T1: mean 2.66, SD 0.60; T2: mean 2.66, SD 0.60) and acquiring information about COVID-19 (T1: mean 2.29, SD 0.82; T2: mean 1.99, SD 0.89) were identified as the most common coping strategies for the entire study population. Using thematic analysis, we identified 8 themes of personal experiences on the micro, meso, and macro levels. Measures, working conditions, feelings and emotions, and social climate were frequently mentioned topics of the participants. In T1, feelings of isolation and uncertainty were prominent. In T2, feelings of exhaustion were expressed and vaccination was frequently discussed. Moreover, unmet psychosocial needs were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for improvement in pandemic preparedness. Targeted vocational education measures and setting up of web-based mental health support could be useful to bridge gaps in psychosocial support needs in future crises.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Personnel , EuropeABSTRACT
For many years, pulse oximetry has been widely used in the clinical environment for a reliable monitoring of oxygen saturation ( SpO2) and heart rate. But since common sensors are mainly placed to peripheral body parts as finger or earlobe, it is still highly susceptible to reduced peripheral perfusion, e.g., due to centralization. Therefore, a novel in-ear pulse oximetric sensor (placed against the tragus) was presented in a prior work which is deemed to be independent from perfusion fluctuations due to its proximity to the trunk. Having demonstrated the feasibility of in-ear SpO2 measurement with reliable specificity in a laboratory setting, we now report results from a study on in-ear SpO2 in a clinical setting. For this, trials were performed on 29 adult patients undergoing surgery. In-ear SpO2 data are compared with SaO2 data obtained by blood gas analysis, and with three reference pulse oximeters applied to the finger, ear lobe, and forehead. In addition, we derived an SpO2-independent perfusion index by means of the wavelengths used. The feasibility and robustness of in-ear SpO2 measurement is demonstrated under challenging clinical conditions. SpO2 shows good accordance with SaO2, a high level of comparability with the reference pulse oximeters, and was significantly improved by introducing a new algorithm for artifact reduction. The perfusion index also shows a good correlation with the reference data.
