» Articles » PMID: 35789691

Acceptance of E-mental Health Interventions and Its Determinants Among Psychotherapists-in-training During the First Phase of COVID-19

Overview
Journal Internet Interv
Date 2022 Jul 5
PMID 35789691
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Although E-mental health (EMH) interventions have been shown to be effective in the treatment of mental health problems and empirical knowledge regarding EMH acceptance for different occupations in health care is established, little is known regarding EMH and psychotherapists-in-training. This seems particularly relevant as psychotherapists-in-training will shape the future health care system since they are as being the next generation of psychotherapists. With social distancing measures in place, COVID-19 has led to an increased demand for EMH, which is broadening the way psychological treatments are delivered.

Objective: The present study aims to assess the acceptance of EMH and its determinants among psychotherapists-in-training of different EMH modalities and to retrospectively compare current acceptance with pre-COVID-19 times.

Methods: Altogether, 29 training institutions in Switzerland and 232 training institutions in Germany were contacted, resulting in a sample of  = 216 psychotherapists-in-training (88.4 % female) who filled out the self-administered web-based questionnaire in summer 2020. The acceptance of EMH was assessed considering several different modalities (e.g., videoconference, guided self-help programs) as well as further possible predictors of EMH acceptance based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Acceptance scores were categorized as low, moderate or high based on prior research and predicted using multiple regression.

Results: Acceptance of EMH was moderate ( = 3.40,  = 1.11) and increased significantly ((215) = 12.03,  < .01;  = 0.88) compared to pre-COVID-19 ( = 2.67,  = 1.11); however, acceptance varied significantly between modalities (F(2.6, 561.7) = 62.93,  < .01, partial η = 0.23), with videoconferencing being the most accepted and unguided programs the least. Stepwise regression including three of 14 variables (R = 0.55, F (14, 201) = 17.68,  < .001) identified , and as significant determinants of EMH acceptance.

Discussion: Acceptance by psychotherapists-in-training was moderate and in line with prior research and comparable with other clinicians' acceptance scores. , and were predictive of EMH acceptance, indicating their significance in the implementation of EMH in health care.

Conclusion: These findings underline the importance of the aforementioned determinants of EMH acceptance and the need for further studies investigating EMH acceptance in order to derive adequate educational programs and to facilitate dissemination among psychotherapists-in-training.

Citing Articles

Current trends in e-mental health interventions: Health care providers' attitudes and usage patterns.

Weitzel E, Schladitz K, Schwenke M, Welzel F, Schomerus G, Schonknecht P Internet Interv. 2025; 39:100808.

PMID: 39991729 PMC: 11847231. DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2025.100808.


Acceptance and Use of eHealth in Support and Psychological Therapy for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Two Cross-Sectional Studies of Health Care Professionals.

Oudshoorn C, Frielink N, Riper H, Embregts P JMIR Form Res. 2024; 8():e52788.

PMID: 39531275 PMC: 11599880. DOI: 10.2196/52788.


Exploring subgroups of acceptance prediction for e-mental health among psychotherapists-in-training: a latent class analysis.

Staeck R, Stuble M, Druge M Front Psychiatry. 2024; 15:1296449.

PMID: 38550532 PMC: 10973105. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1296449.


The effectiveness of CBT-based daily supportive text messages in improving female mental health during COVID-19 pandemic: results from the Text4Hope program.

Dias R, Shalaby R, Agyapong B, Vuong W, Gusnowski A, Surood S Front Glob Womens Health. 2023; 4:1182267.

PMID: 38025982 PMC: 10667914. DOI: 10.3389/fgwh.2023.1182267.

References
1.
Steel K, Cox D, Garry H . Therapeutic videoconferencing interventions for the treatment of long-term conditions. J Telemed Telecare. 2011; 17(3):109-17. DOI: 10.1258/jtt.2010.100318. View

2.
Kohn R, Saxena S, Levav I, Saraceno B . The treatment gap in mental health care. Bull World Health Organ. 2005; 82(11):858-66. PMC: 2623050. DOI: /S0042-96862004001100011. View

3.
Li J, Talaei-Khoei A, Seale H, Ray P, MacIntyre C . Health Care Provider Adoption of eHealth: Systematic Literature Review. Interact J Med Res. 2013; 2(1):e7. PMC: 3628149. DOI: 10.2196/ijmr.2468. View

4.
Philippi P, Baumeister H, Apolinario-Hagen J, Ebert D, Hennemann S, Kott L . Acceptance towards digital health interventions - Model validation and further development of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Internet Interv. 2021; 26:100459. PMC: 8463857. DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2021.100459. View

5.
Donker T, Blankers M, Hedman E, Ljotsson B, Petrie K, Christensen H . Economic evaluations of Internet interventions for mental health: a systematic review. Psychol Med. 2015; 45(16):3357-76. DOI: 10.1017/S0033291715001427. View