将智能手机应用程序与一线工作人员创伤后应激障碍治疗相结合:一项试点研究。

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Australian Journal of Psychology Pub Date : 2024-09-09 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/00049530.2024.2399112
Mark Deady, Daniel A J Collins, Suzanna Azevedo, Eileen Stech, Anthony Harrison, Catherine Broomfield, Srishti Yadav, Aimee Gayed, Samuel B Harvey, Richard Bryant
{"title":"将智能手机应用程序与一线工作人员创伤后应激障碍治疗相结合:一项试点研究。","authors":"Mark Deady, Daniel A J Collins, Suzanna Azevedo, Eileen Stech, Anthony Harrison, Catherine Broomfield, Srishti Yadav, Aimee Gayed, Samuel B Harvey, Richard Bryant","doi":"10.1080/00049530.2024.2399112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is hindered by limited uptake, early drop-out and non-response. This pilot study aimed to explore the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a mobile app as part of a blended approach to treating frontline workers experiencing PTSD.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A single-group pre-post study was conducted with 10 adult frontline workers (firefighters, police, correctional workers) receiving trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy for PTSD. Participants used an app (Support Base) designed to consolidate session content and encourage independent skills practice. At post-treatment, feasibility was assessed via app usage data and participant feedback, usability via the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire, and acceptability via items from the Mobile Application Rating Scale: user version.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Usability ratings were above average and the app received an overall mean rating of 3.4/5. Despite generally positive attitudes towards using technology in therapy, participants had low levels of confidence/experience with wellbeing apps and almost half preferred using the standard treatment workbook. Clinicians highlighted a range of client barriers to app use, including difficulties in clinician/client collaboration. Overall, there was significant pre- to post-treatment improvement in clinical measures of PTSD and depression, but this change cannot be tied to app use.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although Support Base was viewed by participants as usable and acceptable, there were feasibility issues which must be further considered in delivering this form of care. Due to the uncontrolled study design, any additive effects of the app beyond standard clinical treatment could not be assessed. The development of a more integrated blended care model is a potential avenue for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":8871,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Psychology","volume":"76 1","pages":"2399112"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12218573/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integration of a smartphone app with posttraumatic stress disorder treatment for frontline workers: a pilot study.\",\"authors\":\"Mark Deady, Daniel A J Collins, Suzanna Azevedo, Eileen Stech, Anthony Harrison, Catherine Broomfield, Srishti Yadav, Aimee Gayed, Samuel B Harvey, Richard Bryant\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00049530.2024.2399112\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is hindered by limited uptake, early drop-out and non-response. This pilot study aimed to explore the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a mobile app as part of a blended approach to treating frontline workers experiencing PTSD.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A single-group pre-post study was conducted with 10 adult frontline workers (firefighters, police, correctional workers) receiving trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy for PTSD. Participants used an app (Support Base) designed to consolidate session content and encourage independent skills practice. At post-treatment, feasibility was assessed via app usage data and participant feedback, usability via the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire, and acceptability via items from the Mobile Application Rating Scale: user version.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Usability ratings were above average and the app received an overall mean rating of 3.4/5. Despite generally positive attitudes towards using technology in therapy, participants had low levels of confidence/experience with wellbeing apps and almost half preferred using the standard treatment workbook. Clinicians highlighted a range of client barriers to app use, including difficulties in clinician/client collaboration. Overall, there was significant pre- to post-treatment improvement in clinical measures of PTSD and depression, but this change cannot be tied to app use.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although Support Base was viewed by participants as usable and acceptable, there were feasibility issues which must be further considered in delivering this form of care. Due to the uncontrolled study design, any additive effects of the app beyond standard clinical treatment could not be assessed. The development of a more integrated blended care model is a potential avenue for future research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Psychology\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"2399112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12218573/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2024.2399112\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2024.2399112","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的治疗受到吸收有限、早期退出和无反应的阻碍。本试点研究旨在探索移动应用程序作为治疗一线创伤后应激障碍工作人员的混合方法的可行性、可接受性和可用性。方法:对10名接受创伤性认知行为治疗的一线工作人员(消防员、警察、惩教人员)进行单组后前研究。参与者使用了一个应用程序(支持基地),旨在巩固会议内容并鼓励独立技能练习。在治疗后,通过应用程序使用数据和参与者反馈评估可行性,通过移动健康应用程序可用性问卷评估可用性,通过移动应用程序评分量表中的项目评估可接受性:用户版本。结果:可用性评分高于平均水平,该应用的整体平均评分为3.4/5。尽管在治疗中使用技术普遍持积极态度,但参与者对健康应用程序的信心/经验水平较低,几乎一半的人更喜欢使用标准治疗手册。临床医生强调了客户使用app的一系列障碍,包括临床医生/客户合作的困难。总的来说,PTSD和抑郁症的临床测量在治疗前和治疗后有显著的改善,但这种变化不能与应用程序的使用联系起来。结论:虽然参与者认为支持基地是可用的和可接受的,但在提供这种形式的护理时,还必须进一步考虑可行性问题。由于非受控研究设计,该应用程序在标准临床治疗之外的任何附加效应都无法评估。发展一种更综合的混合护理模式是未来研究的潜在途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Integration of a smartphone app with posttraumatic stress disorder treatment for frontline workers: a pilot study.

Integration of a smartphone app with posttraumatic stress disorder treatment for frontline workers: a pilot study.

Integration of a smartphone app with posttraumatic stress disorder treatment for frontline workers: a pilot study.

Integration of a smartphone app with posttraumatic stress disorder treatment for frontline workers: a pilot study.

Objective: Treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is hindered by limited uptake, early drop-out and non-response. This pilot study aimed to explore the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a mobile app as part of a blended approach to treating frontline workers experiencing PTSD.

Method: A single-group pre-post study was conducted with 10 adult frontline workers (firefighters, police, correctional workers) receiving trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy for PTSD. Participants used an app (Support Base) designed to consolidate session content and encourage independent skills practice. At post-treatment, feasibility was assessed via app usage data and participant feedback, usability via the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire, and acceptability via items from the Mobile Application Rating Scale: user version.

Results: Usability ratings were above average and the app received an overall mean rating of 3.4/5. Despite generally positive attitudes towards using technology in therapy, participants had low levels of confidence/experience with wellbeing apps and almost half preferred using the standard treatment workbook. Clinicians highlighted a range of client barriers to app use, including difficulties in clinician/client collaboration. Overall, there was significant pre- to post-treatment improvement in clinical measures of PTSD and depression, but this change cannot be tied to app use.

Conclusions: Although Support Base was viewed by participants as usable and acceptable, there were feasibility issues which must be further considered in delivering this form of care. Due to the uncontrolled study design, any additive effects of the app beyond standard clinical treatment could not be assessed. The development of a more integrated blended care model is a potential avenue for future research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Journal of Psychology
Australian Journal of Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Australian Journal of Psychology is the premier scientific journal of the Australian Psychological Society. It covers the entire spectrum of psychological research and receives articles on all topics within the broad scope of the discipline. The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles with reviewers and associate editors providing detailed assistance to authors to reach publication. The journal publishes reports of experimental and survey studies, including reports of qualitative investigations, on pure and applied topics in the field of psychology. Articles on clinical psychology or on the professional concerns of applied psychology should be submitted to our sister journals, Australian Psychologist or Clinical Psychologist. The journal publishes occasional reviews of specific topics, theoretical pieces and commentaries on methodological issues. There are also solicited book reviews and comments Annual special issues devoted to a single topic, and guest edited by a specialist editor, are published. The journal regards itself as international in vision and will accept submissions from psychologists in all countries.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信