Tim R Wind1, Marleen Rijkeboer2, Gerhard Andersson3,4, Heleen Riper5,6. 1. Foundation Centrum '45, Oegstgeest, The Netherlands|partner in Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group, Nienoord 5, 1112 XE Diemen, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Behavioural Science and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 4. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 6. Department of Research and Innovation, GGZ in Geest/Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
In February 2020, Duan and Zhu (2020) stressed the need for a solid Chinese evidence-based mental health care system in times of public health emergencies such as the outbreak of the Coronavirus disease- 2019 (COVID-19). That would enable treatment of people who suffer from mental health problems in relation to the epidemic. The WHO has meanwhile labelled the Coronavirus a pandemic, and it is now hitting Europe, the USA, Australia and Asia hard as well. In an attempt to reduce the risk of infections, many mental health care providers in afflicted countries are currently closing their doors for patients who need ambulatory face-to-face therapy. They are simultaneously trying to replace some of these contacts with digital therapies. Most probably, European mental health care institutions have yet to experience the full impact of the coronavirus crisis. At the same time, the demand for mental health care among infectedpatients and their relatives is expected to rise (Blumenstyk, 2020). Levels of anxiety will increase, both through direct causes including fears of contamination, stress, grief, and depression triggered by exposure to the virus, and through influences from the consequences of the social and economic mayhem that is occurring on individual and societal levels. We expect that this “black swan” moment (Blumenstyk, 2020) - an unforeseen event that changes everything - will lead to a partly, though robust, shift in mental health care provision towards online prevention, treatment, and care in the near future. We also need to consider the role of psychological processes and fear that may cause further harm on top of the pandemic (Asmundson and Taylor, 2020).The obvious solution to continue mental health care within a pandemic is to provide mental health care at a ‘warm’ distance by video-conferencing psychotherapy and internet interventions. A systematic review showed that videoconferencing psychotherapy show promising results for anxiety and mood disorders (Berryhill et al., 2019), and the evidence-base for therapist-guided internet interventions is even stronger (Andersson, 2016; Karyotaki et al., 2018). Yet, despite two decades of evidence-based e-mental health services, numerous barriers have stalled the overall implementation in routine care thus far (Vis et al., 2018; Tuerk et al., 2019). One of the most important barriers highlighted, however, has been that e-mental health has not been integrated as a normal part of routine care practice due to the lack of acceptance by health professionals themselves (Topooco et al., 2017). Myths on telehealth such as “the therapeutic alliance can only be established face-to-face” have dominated the field, in spite of research showing the opposite (Berger, 2017). In that sense, learning curves in the adoption of new e-mental health technologies by both patients and psychologists have progressed far more slowly than initially expected, thus tallying with the estimate that it takes on average16 years for a health care innovation to be implemented (Rogers et al., 2017). There are however exceptions in the world but progress is still slow.In the Netherlands, Sweden and elsewhere, we are now witnessing a phenomenon whereby the outbreak of COVID-19 is hastening managers, ICT-staff, and clinicians to overcome all such barriers overnight, from a pragmatic standpoint seldom seen before. The virus seems a greater catalyst for the implementation of online therapy and e-health tools in routine practice than two decades of many brilliant, but failed, attempts in this domain (Mohr et al., 2018). After all, since predictions about COVID-19 are largely unclear as of yet, it is now time to create a longer-term solution to the problem of heterogeneous patient populations, such as those still active in the community and those that are house-bound or isolated in hospitals. Videoconferencing and internet interventions could therefore be very helpful in mental health care, as well as in physical care and can be easily upscaled to serve isolated regions and reach across borders.Thus, the “black swan virus” has already enabled wide-scale acceptance of videoconferencing by health professionals and patients alike – creating a win-win situation for both. We should stress that e-mental health applications hold value far beyond the provision of videoconferencing psychotherapy in the current situation of crisis. Countries hit by the Corona virus may also consider adopting a wider public e-mental health approach, which would focus additionally on prevention and on reaching people at risk for mental health disorders. In this respect, not only guided but also fully self-guided interventions, such as self-help apps or online therapeutic modules, could also be applied in settings and countries with scarce mental health resources (Christiani and Setiawan, 2018). We should also consider the need for treatment development (for the psychological problems caused by corona virus isolation), which is by far more rapid in the field of internet interventions than in traditional psychotherapy (Andersson et al., 2018).It is likely that the response to this emergency will be more than a temporary increase in online work (Blumenstyk, 2020). Once mental health care institutions have developed the capabilities of serving their patients via videoconferencing and other digital technologies, there is little reason for them to give these up, in view of the many advantages (Blumenstyk, 2020; Tuerk et al., 2019). This black swan should be a call for action by encouraging providers to move more rapidly towards blended care models (van der Vaart et al., 2014; Kooistra et al., 2019). Agility, flexibility, and resilience are essential skills for 21-st-century institutions, particularly when unforeseen disruptive viruses and devastating events driven by climate change are likely to be increasingly common (Blumenstyk, 2020). We urge practitioners to promptly start adopting e-mental health care applications, both as methods to continue their care to current patients in need and as interventions to cope with the imminent upsurge in mental health symptoms due to the coronavirus.
Authors: Gerhard Andersson; Nickolai Titov; Blake F Dear; Alexander Rozental; Per Carlbring Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Eirini Karyotaki; David Daniel Ebert; Liesje Donkin; Heleen Riper; Jos Twisk; Simone Burger; Alexander Rozental; Alfred Lange; Alishia D Williams; Anna Carlotta Zarski; Anna Geraedts; Annemieke van Straten; Annet Kleiboer; Björn Meyer; Burçin B Ünlü Ince; Claudia Buntrock; Dirk Lehr; Frank J Snoek; Gavin Andrews; Gerhard Andersson; Isabella Choi; Jeroen Ruwaard; Jan Philipp Klein; Jill M Newby; Johanna Schröder; Johannes A C Laferton; Kim Van Bastelaar; Kotaro Imamura; Kristofer Vernmark; Leif Boß; Lisa B Sheeber; Marie Kivi; Matthias Berking; Nickolai Titov; Per Carlbring; Robert Johansson; Robin Kenter; Sarah Perini; Steffen Moritz; Stephanie Nobis; Thomas Berger; Viktor Kaldo; Yvonne Forsell; Nils Lindefors; Martin Kraepelien; Cecilia Björkelund; Norito Kawakami; Pim Cuijpers Journal: Clin Psychol Rev Date: 2018-06-19
Authors: Rosalie van der Vaart; Marjon Witting; Heleen Riper; Lisa Kooistra; Ernst T Bohlmeijer; Lisette J E W C van Gemert-Pijnen Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2014-12-14 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Lisa Catharine Kooistra; Jenneke Elize Wiersma; Jeroen Ruwaard; Koen Neijenhuijs; Joran Lokkerbol; Patricia van Oppen; Filip Smit; Heleen Riper Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-10-29 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Darren Courtney; Priya Watson; Marco Battaglia; Benoit H Mulsant; Peter Szatmari Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Natalie Simon; Lindsay Robertson; Catrin Lewis; Neil P Roberts; Andrew Bethell; Sarah Dawson; Jonathan I Bisson Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-05-20
Authors: Tamra Burns Loeb; Megan T Ebor; Amber M Smith-Clapham; Dorothy Chin; Derek M Novacek; Joya N Hampton-Anderson; Enricka Norwood-Scott; Alison B Hamilton; Arleen F Brown; Gail E Wyatt Journal: Traumatology (Tallahass Fla) Date: 2020-12-10
Authors: Anouk S Schuit; Karen Holtmaat; Valesca van Zwieten; Eline J Aukema; Lotte Gransier; Pim Cuijpers; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2021-04-22
Authors: Eirini Karyotaki; Orestis Efthimiou; Clara Miguel; Frederic Maas Genannt Bermpohl; Toshi A Furukawa; Pim Cuijpers; Heleen Riper; Vikram Patel; Adriana Mira; Alan W Gemmil; Albert S Yeung; Alfred Lange; Alishia D Williams; Andrew Mackinnon; Anna Geraedts; Annemieke van Straten; Björn Meyer; Cecilia Björkelund; Christine Knaevelsrud; Christopher G Beevers; Cristina Botella; Daniel R Strunk; David C Mohr; David D Ebert; David Kessler; Derek Richards; Elizabeth Littlewood; Erik Forsell; Fan Feng; Fang Wang; Gerhard Andersson; Heather Hadjistavropoulos; Heleen Christensen; Iony D Ezawa; Isabella Choi; Isabelle M Rosso; Jan Philipp Klein; Jason Shumake; Javier Garcia-Campayo; Jeannette Milgrom; Jessica Smith; Jesus Montero-Marin; Jill M Newby; Juana Bretón-López; Justine Schneider; Kristofer Vernmark; Lara Bücker; Lisa B Sheeber; Lisanne Warmerdam; Louise Farrer; Manuel Heinrich; Marcus J H Huibers; Marie Kivi; Martin Kraepelien; Nicholas R Forand; Nicky Pugh; Nils Lindefors; Ove Lintvedt; Pavle Zagorscak; Per Carlbring; Rachel Phillips; Robert Johansson; Ronald C Kessler; Sally Brabyn; Sarah Perini; Scott L Rauch; Simon Gilbody; Steffen Moritz; Thomas Berger; Victor Pop; Viktor Kaldo; Viola Spek; Yvonne Forsell Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Renato de Filippis; Joan Soler-Vidal; Victor Pereira-Sanchez; Margaret Isioma Ojeahere; Kana Morimoto; Alice Chang; Andre Luiz Schuh Teixeira; Alex Vicente Spadini Journal: Perspect Psychiatr Care Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Anne Honey; Shifra Waks; Monique Hines; Helen Glover; Nicola Hancock; Debra Hamilton; Jennifer Smith-Merry Journal: Community Ment Health J Date: 2021-07-07