M Alvarez-Jimenez1, M A Alcazar-Corcoles2, C González-Blanch3, S Bendall4, P D McGorry4, J F Gleeson5. 1. Orygen Youth Health Research Centre, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address: malvarez@unimelb.edu.au. 2. Department of Biological and Health Psychology, School of Psychology, Autonomous University of Madrid, Spain. 3. Mental Health Centre, University Hospital Marques de Valdecilla, Spain. 4. Orygen Youth Health Research Centre, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia. 5. School of Psychology, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Internet and mobile-based interventions provide a unique opportunity to deliver cost-effective, accessible, time-unlimited support to people with psychosis. The aims of this study were to systematically compile and analyze the evidence on the acceptability, feasibility, safety and benefits of online and mobile-based interventions for psychosis. METHODS: Systematic review of peer-reviewed studies examining the usability, acceptability, feasibility, safety or efficacy of user-led, Internet or mobile-based interventions, with at least 80% of participants diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. RESULTS: Of 38 potentially relevant articles, 12 were eligible for inclusion. Interventions included web-based psycho-education; web-based psycho-education plus moderated forums for patients and supporters; integrated web-based therapy, social networking and peer and expert moderation; web-based CBT; personalized advice based on clinical monitoring; and text messaging interventions. Results showed that 74-86% of patients used the web-based interventions efficiently, 75-92% perceived them as positive and useful, and 70-86% completed or were engaged with the interventions over the follow-up. Preliminary evidence indicated that online and mobile-based interventions show promise in improving positive psychotic symptoms, hospital admissions, socialization, social connectedness, depression and medication adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Internet and mobile-based interventions for psychosis seem to be acceptable and feasible and have the potential to improve clinical and social outcomes. The heterogeneity, poor quality and early state of current research precludes any definite conclusions. Future research should investigate the efficacy of online and mobile interventions through controlled, well-powered studies, which investigate intervention and patient factors associated with take-up and intervention effects.
BACKGROUND: Internet and mobile-based interventions provide a unique opportunity to deliver cost-effective, accessible, time-unlimited support to people with psychosis. The aims of this study were to systematically compile and analyze the evidence on the acceptability, feasibility, safety and benefits of online and mobile-based interventions for psychosis. METHODS: Systematic review of peer-reviewed studies examining the usability, acceptability, feasibility, safety or efficacy of user-led, Internet or mobile-based interventions, with at least 80% of participants diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. RESULTS: Of 38 potentially relevant articles, 12 were eligible for inclusion. Interventions included web-based psycho-education; web-based psycho-education plus moderated forums for patients and supporters; integrated web-based therapy, social networking and peer and expert moderation; web-based CBT; personalized advice based on clinical monitoring; and text messaging interventions. Results showed that 74-86% of patients used the web-based interventions efficiently, 75-92% perceived them as positive and useful, and 70-86% completed or were engaged with the interventions over the follow-up. Preliminary evidence indicated that online and mobile-based interventions show promise in improving positive psychotic symptoms, hospital admissions, socialization, social connectedness, depression and medication adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Internet and mobile-based interventions for psychosis seem to be acceptable and feasible and have the potential to improve clinical and social outcomes. The heterogeneity, poor quality and early state of current research precludes any definite conclusions. Future research should investigate the efficacy of online and mobile interventions through controlled, well-powered studies, which investigate intervention and patient factors associated with take-up and intervention effects.
Authors: Fiona Lobban; Nadia Akers; Duncan Appelbe; Rossella Iraci Capuccinello; Lesley Chapman; Lizzi Collinge; Susanna Dodd; Sue Flowers; Bruce Hollingsworth; Mahsa Honary; Sonia Johnson; Steven H Jones; Ceu Mateus; Barbara Mezes; Elizabeth Murray; Katerina Panagaki; Naomi Rainford; Heather Robinson; Anna Rosala-Hallas; William Sellwood; Andrew Walker; Paula R Williamson Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: John A Naslund; Kelly A Aschbrenner; Lisa A Marsch; Gregory J McHugo; Stephen J Bartels Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Elizabeth J Record; Deborah R Medoff; Lisa B Dixon; Elizabeth A Klingaman; Stephanie G Park; Samantha Hack; Clayton H Brown; Li Juan Fang; Julie Kreyenbuhl Journal: Community Ment Health J Date: 2015-03-31
Authors: Joseph Firth; John Torous; Brendon Stubbs; Josh A Firth; Genevieve Z Steiner; Lee Smith; Mario Alvarez-Jimenez; John Gleeson; Davy Vancampfort; Christopher J Armitage; Jerome Sarris Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: John A Naslund; Kelly A Aschbrenner; Sunny Jung Kim; Gregory J McHugo; Jürgen Unützer; Stephen J Bartels; Lisa A Marsch Journal: Psychiatr Rehabil J Date: 2017-02-09