Randomized Trial of the Effectiveness of Videoconferencing-Based Versus Message-Based Psychotherapy on Depression.

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared the engagement, clinical outcomes, and adverse events of text or voice message-based psychotherapy (MBP) versus videoconferencing-based psychotherapy (VCP) among adults with depression. METHODS: The study used a sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial design with data drawn from phase 1 of a two-phase small business innovation research study. In total, 215 adults (ages ≥18 years) with depression received care from Talkspace, a digital mental health care company. Participants were initially randomly assigned to receive either asynchronous MBP or weekly VCP. All therapists provided evidence-based treatments such as cognitive-behavioral therapy. After 6 weeks of treatment, participants whose condition did not show a response on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 or was rated as having not improved on the Clinical Global Impressions scale were randomly reassigned to receive either weekly VCP plus MBP or monthly VCP plus MBP. Longitudinal mixed-effects models with piecewise linear time trends applied to multiple imputed data sets were used to address missingness of data. RESULTS: Participants who were initially assigned to the MBP condition engaged with their therapists over more weeks than did participants in the VCP condition (7.8 weeks for MBP vs. 4.9 weeks for VCP; p<0.001). No meaningful differences were observed between the two groups in rates of change by 6 or 12 weeks for depression, anxiety, disability, or global ratings of improvement. Neither treatment resulted in any adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: MBP appears to be a viable alternative to VCP for treating adults with depression.

An Integrative Engagement Model of Digital Psychotherapy: Exploratory Focus Group Findings.

BACKGROUND: Digital mental health interventions, such as 2-way and asynchronous messaging therapy, are a growing part of the mental health care treatment ecosystem, yet little is known about how users engage with these interventions over the course of their treatment journeys. User engagement, or client behaviors and therapeutic relationships that facilitate positive treatment outcomes, is a necessary condition for the effectiveness of any digital treatment. Developing a better understanding of the factors that impact user engagement can impact the overall effectiveness of digital psychotherapy. Mapping the user experience in digital therapy may be facilitated by integrating theories from several fields. Specifically, health science's Health Action Process Approach and human-computer interaction's Lived Informatics Model may be usefully synthesized with relational constructs from psychotherapy process-outcome research to identify the determinants of engagement in digital messaging therapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to capture insights into digital therapy users' engagement patterns through a qualitative analysis of focus group sessions. We aimed to synthesize emergent intrapersonal and relational determinants of engagement into an integrative framework of engagement in digital therapy. METHODS: A total of 24 focus group participants were recruited to participate in 1 of 5 synchronous focus group sessions held between October and November 2021. Participant responses were coded by 2 researchers using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Coders identified 10 relevant constructs and 24 subconstructs that can collectively account for users' engagement and experience trajectories in the context of digital therapy. Although users' engagement trajectories in digital therapy varied widely, they were principally informed by intrapsychic factors (eg, self-efficacy and outcome expectancy), interpersonal factors (eg, the therapeutic alliance and its rupture), and external factors (eg, treatment costs and social support). These constructs were organized into a proposed Integrative Engagement Model of Digital Psychotherapy. Notably, every participant in the focus groups indicated that their ability to connect with their therapist was among the most important factors that were considered in continuing or terminating treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Engagement in messaging therapy may be usefully approached through an interdisciplinary lens, linking constructs from health science, human-computer interaction studies, and clinical science in an integrative engagement framework. Taken together, our results suggest that users may not view the digital psychotherapy platform itself as a treatment so much as a means of gaining access to a helping provider, that is, users did not see themselves as engaging with a platform but instead viewed their experience as a healing relationship. The findings of this study suggest that a better understanding of user engagement is crucial for enhancing the effectiveness of digital mental health interventions, and future research should continue to explore the underlying factors that contribute to engagement in digital mental health interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04507360; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04507360.

Participant retention in a fully remote trial of digital psychotherapy: Comparison of incentive types.

Numerous studies have found that long term retention is very low in remote clinical studies (>4 weeks) and to date there is limited information on the best methods to ensure retention. The ability to retain participants in the completion of key assessments periods is critical to all clinical research, and to date little is known as to what methods are best to encourage participant retention. To study incentive-based retention methods we randomized 215 US adults (18+ years) who agreed to participate in a sequential, multiple assignment randomized trial to either high monetary incentive (HMI, $125 USD) and combined low monetary incentive ($75 USD) plus alternative incentive (LMAI). Participants were asked to complete daily and weekly surveys for a total of 12 weeks, which included a tailoring assessment around week 5 to determine who should be stepped up and rerandomized to one of two augmentation conditions. Key assessment points were weeks 5 and 12. There was no difference in participant retention at week 5 (tailoring event), with approximately 75% of the sample completing the week-5 survey. By week 10, the HMI condition retained approximately 70% of the sample, compared to 60% of the LMAI group. By week 12, all differences were attenuated. Differences in completed measures were not significant between groups. At the end of the study, participants were asked the impressions of the incentive condition they were assigned and asked for suggestions for improving engagement. There were no significant differences between conditions on ratings of the fairness of compensation, study satisfaction, or study burden, but study burden, intrinsic motivation and incentive fairness did influence participation. Men were also more likely to drop out of the study than women. Qualitative analysis from both groups found the following engagement suggestions: desire for feedback on survey responses and an interest in automated sharing of individual survey responses with study therapists to assist in treatment. Participants in the LMAI arm indicated that the alternative incentives were engaging and motivating. In sum, while we were able to increase engagement above what is typical for such study, more research is needed to truly improve long term retention in remote trials.