| Literature DB >> 31066700 |
Raphael Schuster1, Inanna Kalthoff1, Alexandra Walther1, Lena Köhldorfer2, Edith Partinger2, Thomas Berger3, Anton-Rupert Laireiter1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Blended group therapy (bGT) has been investigated a several times for anxiety and depression, but information on patients' adherence to and therapists' perception of the novel format is nonexistent. Furthermore, many studies investigated mainly female and highly educated populations, limiting the validity of previous findings.Entities:
Keywords: computer-assisted therapy; depression; eHealth; group therapy; mobile phone; monitoring; professional-patient relations
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31066700 PMCID: PMC6533044 DOI: 10.2196/11860
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Figure 1Blends of Web-based and face-to-face therapy.
Figure 2Study flow chart. ITT: intention to treat.
Group sessions and computer and multimedia elements of the intervention.
| Week | Web-based module | Group session | App | Workbook |
| 1 | Introduction into mindfulness | Introduction into ACTa, mindfulness | Feature 1: Mindfulness in daily life | List of mindful activities |
| 2 | Natural suffering and suffering through avoidance | Avoidance and acceptance | Feature 2: Acceptance | Acceptance of a difficult situation, topic, character trait, or conflict; Reflection on mindfulness |
| 3 | Defusion | Fusion and defusion | Feature 3: Defusion | Typical examples of defusion |
| 4 | Values, goals, and self-management | Values, mastery, and self-management | Feature 4: Mastery activities | Bull’s-eye exercise; Example and sheet for SMARTb principle; Activity planning |
| 5 | Commitment | Commitment and positive reinforcement | Feature 5a: “Do activities” Feature 5b: “Do not activities” | Determination, ranking, and planning of do- and do not activities; Self-management; Activity planning |
| 6 | Expansion of behavioral activation | Expansion of behavioral activation | Continuation of previous features of the app | Contracts |
| 7 | Review and transfer | Transfer and conclusion | Continuation of previous features of the app | Plan for relapse |
aACT: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.
bSMART: frequent self-management principle.
Figure 3User interfaces of the web-based platform and the smartphone app.
Demographic, behavioral, and clinical characteristics of the sample at pretreatment (N=27).
| Characteristic | Statistics | |
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 37.70 (13.66) | |
| Gender, female n (%) | 14 (51.9) | |
| ≥9 years (compulsory school) | 7 (25.9) | |
| ≥12 years (A level) | 12 (44.4) | |
| ≥any tertiary education (eg, university) | 8 (29.6) | |
| Full time | 11 (40.7) | |
| Part time | 6 (22.2) | |
| None/marginally | 5 (18.5) | |
| Currently in education | 5 (18.5) | |
| Current psychopharmacological treatment, n (%) | 3 (12) | |
| Previous psychotherapeutic treatment, n (%) | 14 (54) | |
| Daily use | 25 (92.6) | |
| Weekly use | 2 (7.4) | |
| F32.0 (mild depressive episode), n (%) | 3 (11.1) | |
| F32.1 (moderate depressive episode), n (%) | 8 (29.6) | |
| F33.0 (recurrent depressive episode, current episode mild), n (%) | 10 (37.0) | |
| F33.1 (recurrent depressive episode, current episode moderate), n (%) | 4 (14.8) | |
| F33.4 (recurrent depressive disorder, in remission—elevated levels of depression), n (%) | 2 (7.4) | |
| F10.1/2 (harmful use of alcohol/addiction) | 1 (3.7) | |
| F40.0 (agoraphobia without panic disorder) | 1 (3.7) | |
| F40.1 (social phobia) | 2 (7.4) | |
| F40.2 (specific phobia) | 1 (3.7) | |
| F41.1 (generalized anxiety disorder) | 3 (11.1) | |
| F43.2 (adjustment disorder) | 1 (3.7) | |
| F50.2 (bulimia nervosa) | 1 (3.7) | |
Means, SDs, effect sizes (Cohen d), and reliable change for primary and secondary outcomes (N=27).
| Questionnaire | Estimated mean (SD) | Effect sizes (estimated mean [95% CI]), pre to post effect size | Reliable change | |||
| Pre | Post | Follow-up | Pre to post RCIa | Pre to follow-up RCI | ||
| CES-Db | 22.44 (5.18) | 13.56 (6.48) | 12.19 (7.94) | 1.51 (0.89 to 2.09) | 74 | 78 |
| GHQ-12c | 16.07 (5.41) | 9.63 (4.39) | 11.94 (7.12) | 1.31 (0.70 to 1.87) | 63 | 52 |
| AAQ-IId | 26.15 (8.87) | 20.71 (8.85) | 18.63 (9.71) | 0.59 (0.02 to 1.14) | —e | — |
| AnTif | 44.33 (10.22) | 36.46 (10.45) | 36.25 (11.59) | 0.72 (0.14 to 1.27) | — | — |
| PSWQ-3g | 7.63 (2.50) | 6.67 (2.76) | 6.50 (2.97) | 0.37 (−0.19 to 0.91) | — | — |
aRCI: reliable change index.
bCES-D: Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale.
cGHQ-12: general health questionnaire (12-item version).
dAAQ-II: Acceptance and Actions Questionnaire.
eNot applicable.
fAnTi: Anxious Thoughts Inventory.
gPSWQ-3: Penn State Worry Questionnaire (ultra-short version).
Figure 4(1) Patients’ completion rates of all intervention elements. (2) Therapists’ average guidance time per patient during entire treatment; a total of 24 min was spent on personal topics, whereas 48 min was spent on feedback on specific exercises. (3) Therapists’ weekly Web-based guidance by single group.
Main themes, subthemes, and frequent codes of therapist interviews.
| Main theme and subtheme | Frequent codes | |
| Patients | Content repeatable; greater learning effect; increased engagement with therapy tasks | |
| Therapists | Additional information through monitoring; helpful for younger therapists; guiding thread | |
| Interaction | Patients more open (online disinhibition); building relationship through intimate Web-based communication | |
| General | Additional effort; data security; limited management of acute crisis; predefined treatment course | |
| Specific | Effects on group climate and cohesion; sessions overloaded | |
| Positive | Contemporary; suitable for in-patient settings; improved handling with increased routine | |
| Negative | Preference toward classic therapy; more training than therapy; technical issues; initial skepticism | |
| Online reminders | Require organized working style; increase compliance; unwanted effects | |
| Online feedback | Important feature; needs to be short in duration | |
| Optional classic treatment path | Adaptation to patient preferences; possible side effects | |
| Differences in patients | Not for severe depression; amount of required guidance time; differences in media affinity; requires openness and compliance | |
Benefits and drawbacks of blended group therapy (bGT) according to interview follow-up survey (n=8).
| Statementa | Percentages | Mean (SD) | |
| Agree (rather agree) | Disagree (rather disagree) | ||
| I am more open after experience with bGTa | 25 (75) | 0 (0) | 3.25 (0.46) |
| I am more critical after experience with bGTa | 0 (0) | 13 (88) | 1.86 (0.36) |
| I have serious concerns about data safetya | 0 (25) | 25 (50) | 2.00 (0.76) |
| bGT may also be feasible for in-patient treatmenta | 13 (75) | 0 (13) | 3 (0.53) |
| Advantages of more flexible working hours because of Web-based guidancea | 50 (38) | 13 (0) | 3.25 (1.03) |
| Computer elementsb should be used for in-session supporta | 50 (25) | 0 (25) | 3.25 (0.89) |
| Overuse of in-session media can hamper group dynamicsa | 50 (38) | 0 (13) | 3.38 (0.75) |
| Overuse of in-session media did hamper dynamics in my groupsa | 0 (25) | 50 (25) | 1.75 (0.87) |
| Computer elementsc should be used for between-session supporta | 63 (38) | 0 (0) | 3.63 (0.52) |
| Platform prepares patients optimally for group reunionsa | 38 (63) | 0 (0) | 3.38 (0.52) |
| Repeated application of therapy content fosters abilities (CE, app, and session)a | 38 (63) | 0 (0) | 3.38 (0.52) |
| Reminders increased compliance with Web-based tasksa | 13 (75) | 0 (13) | 3.00 (0.53) |
| bGT cannot increase treatment transfera | 0 (13) | 38 (50) | 1.75 (0.71) |
| Reminders did exert a lot of pressure on some patientsa | 13 (50) | 0 (38) | 2.75 (0.71) |
| Additional between-session therapist time needs to be reimburseda | 88 (13) | 0 (0) | 3.88 (0.35) |
| Patients shared additional private concerns over platform (online disinhibition)a,d | 50 (34) | 0 (17) | 3.33 (0.82) |
| Between-session contact made me feel more connected with clientsa,d | 17 (83) | 0 (0) | 3.17 (0.41) |
| Between-session contact does not promote relationship with clienta,d | 0 (0) | 33 (67) | 1.67 (0.52) |
aExact wording is provided in Multimedia Appendix 2.
bSlides and videos.
cPlatform, app, and monitoring.
dOptional questions only applied to 6 therapists.