Reach, uptake, and psychological outcomes of two publicly funded internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy programs in Ontario, Canada: an observational study.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Bilal Noreen Khan, Rebecca H Liu, Cherry Chu, Blanca Bolea-Alamañac, Megan Nguyen, Serena Thapar, Roz Fanaieyan, Marisa Leon-Carlyle, Mina Tadrous, Paul Kurdyak, Anne O'Riordan, Maggie Keresteci, Onil Bhattacharyya
{"title":"Reach, uptake, and psychological outcomes of two publicly funded internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy programs in Ontario, Canada: an observational study.","authors":"Bilal Noreen Khan, Rebecca H Liu, Cherry Chu, Blanca Bolea-Alamañac, Megan Nguyen, Serena Thapar, Roz Fanaieyan, Marisa Leon-Carlyle, Mina Tadrous, Paul Kurdyak, Anne O'Riordan, Maggie Keresteci, Onil Bhattacharyya","doi":"10.1186/s13033-024-00651-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Access to traditional mental health services in Canada remains limited, prompting exploration into digital alternatives. The Government of Ontario initiated access to two internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) programs, LifeWorks AbilitiCBT and MindBeacon TAiCBT, for adults with mental health issues.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An uncontrolled observational study utilizing secondary retrospective program data was conducted to evaluate the reach, uptake, and psychological symptom changes among participants engaging with either iCBT program.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between May 2020 and September 2021, 56,769 individuals enrolled in LifeWorks AbilitiCBT, and 73,356 in MindBeacon TAiCBT. However, substantial exclusions were made: 56% of LifeWorks participants and 68% of MindBeacon participants were ineligible or failed to initiate treatment. Consequently, 25,154 LifeWorks participants and 23,795 MindBeacon participants were included in the analysis. Of these, 22% of LifeWorks and 26% of MindBeacon participants completed over 75% of iCBT treatment. On average, LifeWorks participants received 13 ± SD 7.1 therapist messages and sent 5 ± SD 10.3 messages, while MindBeacon participants received 25 ± SD 20.7 therapist messages and sent 13 ± SD 16.4 messages. LifeWorks included synchronous therapist contact averaging 1.4 ± SD 1.9 h per participant, while MindBeacon was purely asynchronous. Baseline severity of anxiety (37%) and depression symptoms (22%) was higher for LifeWorks participants compared to MindBeacon participants (24% and 10%, respectively). Clinically significant changes in anxiety and depression scores were observed: 22% of LifeWorks and 31% of MindBeacon participants exhibited reliable recovery in PHQ-9 scores, while 26% of LifeWorks and 25% of MindBeacon participants demonstrated reliable recovery in GAD-7 scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, iCBT programs show promise for engaged participants with varying levels of severity in anxiety and depression symptoms. Future iterations of iCBT should consider adopting a broad entry criterion to iCBT programming to increase accessibility, especially for those with severe symptoms, alongside integrated intake care pathways, and potential payment structure adjustments for iCBT service providers. Taken all together, these factors could temper high dropout rates post-intake assessment. This evaluation underscores the potential and value of digital mental health interventions for individuals with mild to severe anxiety or depression symptoms, emphasizing the importance of addressing participant dropout.</p>","PeriodicalId":47752,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Mental Health Systems","volume":"18 1","pages":"34"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11546333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Mental Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-024-00651-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Access to traditional mental health services in Canada remains limited, prompting exploration into digital alternatives. The Government of Ontario initiated access to two internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) programs, LifeWorks AbilitiCBT and MindBeacon TAiCBT, for adults with mental health issues.

Methods: An uncontrolled observational study utilizing secondary retrospective program data was conducted to evaluate the reach, uptake, and psychological symptom changes among participants engaging with either iCBT program.

Results: Between May 2020 and September 2021, 56,769 individuals enrolled in LifeWorks AbilitiCBT, and 73,356 in MindBeacon TAiCBT. However, substantial exclusions were made: 56% of LifeWorks participants and 68% of MindBeacon participants were ineligible or failed to initiate treatment. Consequently, 25,154 LifeWorks participants and 23,795 MindBeacon participants were included in the analysis. Of these, 22% of LifeWorks and 26% of MindBeacon participants completed over 75% of iCBT treatment. On average, LifeWorks participants received 13 ± SD 7.1 therapist messages and sent 5 ± SD 10.3 messages, while MindBeacon participants received 25 ± SD 20.7 therapist messages and sent 13 ± SD 16.4 messages. LifeWorks included synchronous therapist contact averaging 1.4 ± SD 1.9 h per participant, while MindBeacon was purely asynchronous. Baseline severity of anxiety (37%) and depression symptoms (22%) was higher for LifeWorks participants compared to MindBeacon participants (24% and 10%, respectively). Clinically significant changes in anxiety and depression scores were observed: 22% of LifeWorks and 31% of MindBeacon participants exhibited reliable recovery in PHQ-9 scores, while 26% of LifeWorks and 25% of MindBeacon participants demonstrated reliable recovery in GAD-7 scores.

Conclusion: In conclusion, iCBT programs show promise for engaged participants with varying levels of severity in anxiety and depression symptoms. Future iterations of iCBT should consider adopting a broad entry criterion to iCBT programming to increase accessibility, especially for those with severe symptoms, alongside integrated intake care pathways, and potential payment structure adjustments for iCBT service providers. Taken all together, these factors could temper high dropout rates post-intake assessment. This evaluation underscores the potential and value of digital mental health interventions for individuals with mild to severe anxiety or depression symptoms, emphasizing the importance of addressing participant dropout.

加拿大安大略省两个由政府资助的基于互联网的认知行为疗法项目的覆盖范围、吸收情况和心理结果:一项观察性研究。
背景:在加拿大,获得传统心理健康服务的机会仍然有限,这促使人们探索数字替代方案。安大略省政府启动了两项基于互联网的认知行为疗法(iCBT)项目--LifeWorks AbilitiCBT 和 MindBeacon TAiCBT,为有心理健康问题的成年人提供服务:方法: 我们利用二次回顾性计划数据开展了一项非对照观察研究,以评估参与 iCBT 计划的参与者的覆盖范围、接受情况和心理症状变化:在 2020 年 5 月至 2021 年 9 月期间,有 56769 人参加了 LifeWorks AbilitiCBT,73356 人参加了 MindBeacon TAiCBT。然而,有大量人被排除在外:56% 的 LifeWorks 参与者和 68% 的 MindBeacon 参与者不符合条件或未能开始治疗。因此,25154 名 LifeWorks 参与者和 23795 名 MindBeacon 参与者被纳入分析。其中,22% 的 LifeWorks 参与者和 26% 的 MindBeacon 参与者完成了 75% 以上的 iCBT 治疗。平均而言,LifeWorks 参与者收到 13 ± SD 7.1 条治疗师信息,发送 5 ± SD 10.3 条信息,而 MindBeacon 参与者收到 25 ± SD 20.7 条治疗师信息,发送 13 ± SD 16.4 条信息。LifeWorks 包括同步治疗师联系,平均每位参与者 1.4 小时(标准差),而 MindBeacon 则是纯粹的异步联系。与 MindBeacon 参与者相比,LifeWorks 参与者的焦虑(37%)和抑郁症状(22%)基线严重程度更高(分别为 24% 和 10%)。焦虑和抑郁评分出现了明显的临床变化:22% 的 LifeWorks 参与者和 31% 的 MindBeacon 参与者的 PHQ-9 评分均有可靠的恢复,而 26% 的 LifeWorks 参与者和 25% 的 MindBeacon 参与者的 GAD-7 评分均有可靠的恢复:总之,iCBT 项目对于焦虑和抑郁症状严重程度不同的参与者显示出了良好的前景。iCBT 的未来迭代应考虑采用宽泛的 iCBT 项目准入标准,以提高可及性,尤其是对那些症状严重的患者,同时还应考虑综合摄入护理路径,以及对 iCBT 服务提供商的支付结构进行潜在调整。综合考虑这些因素,可以降低入院评估后的高辍学率。这项评估强调了数字心理健康干预对于轻度至重度焦虑或抑郁症状患者的潜力和价值,同时也强调了解决参与者辍学问题的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.80%
发文量
52
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信