Telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic
Citation: Appleton R, Williams J, Vera San Juan V, et al. Implementation, adoption, and perceptions of telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2021;23(12):e31746.
Language: Abstract and full text available in EN.
Free to view: Yes.
Funding sources: National Institute for Health Research (UK) and Applied Research Collaboration South London at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (UK).
What is this? In this systematic review, the authors searched for articles on the adoption and impact of telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. They searched in December 2020 for articles published since January 2020. The authors included 77 studies from Australia (5), Canada (5), Spain (5), United States (33), the United Kingdom (9), and multiple other countries (5). This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42021211025.
What was found: The authors found that remote care clinical outcomes could be equal to face-to-face outcomes, however, the service may not be feasible for all consultations and outcomes vary by user and provider. Video and telephone calls were the most common mechanisms to provide care. Benefits were convenience for staff and patients, accessibility, reduced travel, insight into the home lives of patients, and more opportunities for family members to participate in family therapy. Drawbacks of remote care included the need for greater concentration, and difficulty interpreting non-spoken cues. Comfort with virtual services, previous clinical experiences, insurance coverage, support from professional bodies, staff training, access to information, and the development of virtual platforms influenced implementation. Patient experiences were shaped by access to technology and the internet, technical knowledge, concentration in a digital environment, and concerns about privacy and confidentiality.
Implications: The authors stated that there was successful telemental health service delivery in the pandemic and that participants were happy with this method. Future research needs to identify those at risk of digital exclusion, explore cost-effectiveness, and identify services to improve implementation and clinical effectiveness.
Other considerations: The authors of the review discussed their findings in the context of occupation.
This summary was prepared by Joly Ghanawi, checked by Sydney Johnson, and finalized by William Summerskill.