How are information and communication technologies supporting routine outcome monitoring and measurement-based care in psychotherapy? A systematic review
Resumen: Psychotherapy has proven to be effective for a wide range of mental health problems. However, not all patients respond to the treatment as expected (not-on-track patients). Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and measurement-based care (MBC), which consist of monitoring patients between appointments and using this data to guide the intervention, have been shown to be particularly useful for these not-on-track patients. Traditionally, though, ROM and MBC have been challenging, due to the difficulties associated with repeated monitoring of patients and providing real-time feedback to therapists. The use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) might help reduce these challenges. Therefore, we systematically reviewed evidence regarding the use of ICTs for ROM and MBC in face-to-face psychological interventions for mental health problems. The search included published and unpublished studies indexed in the electronic databases PubMed, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS. Main search terms were variations of the terms "psychological treatment", "progress monitoring or measurement-based care", and "technology". Eighteen studies met eligibility criteria. In these, ICTs were frequently handheld technologies, such as smartphone apps, tablets, or laptops, which were involved in the whole process (assessment and feedback). Overall, the use of technology for ROM and MBC during psychological interventions was feasible and acceptable. In addition, the use of ICTs was found to be effective, particularly for not-on-track patients, which is consistent with similar non-ICT research. Given the heterogeneity of reviewed studies, more research and replication is needed to obtain robust findings with different technological solutions and to facilitate the generalization of findings to different mental health populations.
Idioma: Inglés
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17093170
Año: 2020
Publicado en: International journal of environmental research and public health 17, 9 (2020), 3170 [22 pp.]
ISSN: 1661-7827

Factor impacto JCR: 3.39 (2020)
Categ. JCR: PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH rank: 41 / 175 = 0.234 (2020) - Q1 - T1
Categ. JCR: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES rank: 118 / 273 = 0.432 (2020) - Q2 - T2
Categ. JCR: PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH rank: 68 / 202 = 0.337 (2020) - Q2 - T2

Factor impacto SCIMAGO: 0.747 - Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis (Q2) - Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (Q2) - Pollution (Q2)

Tipo y forma: Revisión (Versión definitiva)
Área (Departamento): Área Person.Eval.Trat.Psicoló. (Dpto. Psicología y Sociología)

Creative Commons Debe reconocer adecuadamente la autoría, proporcionar un enlace a la licencia e indicar si se han realizado cambios. Puede hacerlo de cualquier manera razonable, pero no de una manera que sugiera que tiene el apoyo del licenciador o lo recibe por el uso que hace.


Exportado de SIDERAL (2024-03-18-12:32:46)


Visitas y descargas

Este artículo se encuentra en las siguientes colecciones:
Artículos



 Registro creado el 2020-06-16, última modificación el 2024-03-19


Versión publicada:
 PDF
Valore este documento:

Rate this document:
1
2
3
 
(Sin ninguna reseña)