Eileen Bendig1, Natalie Bauereiß, David Daniel Ebert, Frank Snoek, Gerhard Andersson, Harald Baumeister. 1. Institute of Psychology and Education, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Universityof Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Department for Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany; Department of Medical Psychology, VU University Medical Center and Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköpings University, Linköping and Departmentof Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institut, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend psychosocial care as an integral part of medical treatment, but access is often limited. Technology-based approaches provide an attractive opportunity to optimize health outcomes and quality of life in people with chronic somatic diseases e.g. by means of Internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs). The present article provides an overview on the basics of IMIs, applications and their evidence base for people living with chronic somatic diseases. METHODS: We conducted a selective literature search in the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Reviews which included randomized controlled trials investigating psychological IMIs were discussed pertaining to their relevance for the population described. RESULTS: IMIs lead to a change in unfavorable behavior connected to chronic somatic diseases. IMIs can foster protective factors like balanced physical activity or risk factors like smoking or alcohol consumption. However, studies reveal small effect sizes of d=0.25 for physical activity and an averaged effect size of d=0.20 for smoking and alcohol consumption. Additionally, IMIs can be used for the (co-)treatment of chronic somatic diseases, for instance to increase disease-specific selfefficacy in patients with diabetes (d=0.23). Studies included in meta-analyses are often highly heterogenous and are investigated in research contexts with limited health care services relevance. CONCLUSION: IMIs are potentially effective when aiming at lifestyle changes and supporting medical treatment in people with chronic somatic diseases. However, results are still heterogenous and the evidence base is limited regarding specific settings, compounding the discussion of possible ways of implementing IMIs into our healthcare systems.
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend psychosocial care as an integral part of medical treatment, but access is often limited. Technology-based approaches provide an attractive opportunity to optimize health outcomes and quality of life in people with chronic somatic diseases e.g. by means of Internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs). The present article provides an overview on the basics of IMIs, applications and their evidence base for people living with chronic somatic diseases. METHODS: We conducted a selective literature search in the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Reviews which included randomized controlled trials investigating psychological IMIs were discussed pertaining to their relevance for the population described. RESULTS: IMIs lead to a change in unfavorable behavior connected to chronic somatic diseases. IMIs can foster protective factors like balanced physical activity or risk factors like smoking or alcohol consumption. However, studies reveal small effect sizes of d=0.25 for physical activity and an averaged effect size of d=0.20 for smoking and alcohol consumption. Additionally, IMIs can be used for the (co-)treatment of chronic somatic diseases, for instance to increase disease-specific selfefficacy in patients with diabetes (d=0.23). Studies included in meta-analyses are often highly heterogenous and are investigated in research contexts with limited health care services relevance. CONCLUSION: IMIs are potentially effective when aiming at lifestyle changes and supporting medical treatment in people with chronic somatic diseases. However, results are still heterogenous and the evidence base is limited regarding specific settings, compounding the discussion of possible ways of implementing IMIs into our healthcare systems.
Authors: Cathrien R L Beishuizen; Blossom C M Stephan; Willem A van Gool; Carol Brayne; Ron J G Peters; Sandrine Andrieu; Miia Kivipelto; Hilkka Soininen; Wim B Busschers; Eric P Moll van Charante; Edo Richard Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2016-03-11 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Benedikt Kohler; Christina Kellerer; Konrad Schultz; Michael Wittmann; Oxana Atmann; Klaus Linde; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Antonius Schneider Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2020 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Franziska Holtdirk; Anja Mehnert; Mario Weiss; Johannes Mayer; Björn Meyer; Peter Bröde; Maren Claus; Carsten Watzl Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-05-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Eileen Bendig; Dominik Meißner; Benjamin Erb; Lena Weger; Ann-Marie Küchler; Natalie Bauereiss; David Ebert; Harald Baumeister Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Eileen Bendig; Natalie Bauereiß; Claudia Buntrock; Mirela Habibović; David Daniel Ebert; Harald Baumeister Journal: Internet Interv Date: 2021-02-24