Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34456515›Full record

ArticlePsychotherapeut2021

["Achieving closeness in video treatment despite distance"].

Antje Gumz, Sulenur Kanal, Aydan Ünser, Denise Kästner, Franziska Marie Lea Beck-Hiestermann

Open access · greenAbstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Psychotherapeut, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Antje GumzArbeitsgruppe für Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Psychologische Hochschule Berlin, Am Köllnischen Park 2, 10179 Berlin, Deutschland.
Sulenur KanalArbeitsgruppe für Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Psychologische Hochschule Berlin, Am Köllnischen Park 2, 10179 Berlin, Deutschland.
Aydan ÜnserArbeitsgruppe für Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Psychologische Hochschule Berlin, Am Köllnischen Park 2, 10179 Berlin, Deutschland.
Denise KästnerArbeitsgruppe für Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Psychologische Hochschule Berlin, Am Köllnischen Park 2, 10179 Berlin, Deutschland.
Franziska Marie Lea Beck-HiestermannArbeitsgruppe für Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Psychologische Hochschule Berlin, Am Köllnischen Park 2, 10179 Berlin, Deutschland.
Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: As a result of the contact ban issued at the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in March 2020, psychotherapists provided significantly more video-based therapy (VBT) and most of them provided it the first time. To date, there is little research on how therapists experienced VBT during the pandemic and no studies are available that look at possible procedure-specific features. Objective: The aim was to analyze what subjective experiences therapists of different guideline procedures had with the implementation of VBT in times of the COVID 19 pandemic and what advantages and disadvantages they experienced. Methods: This was a mixed methods study with a cross-sectional online survey. In addition to quantitative data, seven open-ended questions were used to collect therapists' subjective experiences with conducting VBT and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The identified categories were subjected to a frequency analysis. Data from 174 medical or psychological psychotherapists were included in the analysis. Results: Particularly frequently mentioned advantages were flexibility of location and time, continuity of contact during pandemic periods and avoidance of risk of infection. The most commonly cited disadvantage was the lack of sensory input, facial expressions, gestures, eye contact, and nonverbal communication. The VBT was well-accepted by most, but not all, patients. Technical problems made the implementation difficult. Conclusion: For many therapists VBT remained a stopgap solution that was not designed to last; however, VBT could help to solve known care problems (e.g., underprovision in rural areas) beyond the pandemic period. The results of the study make an important contribution to weighing up the opportunities and risks of VBT for psychotherapeutic care and for keeping an eye on possible dangers and difficulties.

Indexed as

AttitudesBlended careCommunications mediaCOVID-19eHealth

Identifiers

PMID34456515
PMCPMC8386344
OpenAlexW3195365415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.