Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35068003›Full record

ArticleClinical psychology & psychotherapy2022

Impact of COVID-19 social distancing measures on routine mental health care provision and treatment outcome for common mental disorders in the Netherlands.

Edwin de Beurs, Matthijs Blankers, Jaap Peen, Clara Rademacher, Alicja Podgorski, Jack Dekker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical psychology & psychotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Edwin de BeursResearch Department, Arkin Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Matthijs BlankersResearch Department, Arkin Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaap PeenResearch Department, Arkin Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Clara RademacherDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Leiden Universiteit, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Alicja PodgorskiDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Leiden Universiteit, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jack DekkerResearch Department, Arkin Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe uptake of digital interventions in mental health care (MHC) has been slow, as many therapists and patients believe that in-person contact is essential for establishing a good working relationship and good outcomes in treatment. The public health policies regarding social distancing during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced an abrupt transformation of MHC provisions for outpatients: Since mid-March 2020, nearly all in-person contact was replaced with videoconferencing. The COVID-19 crisis offered a unique opportunity to investigate whether MHC with videoconferencing yields inferior results as compared to in-person interventions.

methodIn a large urban MHC facility in the Netherlands, measurement-based care is routine practice. Outcome data are regularly collected to support shared decision making and monitor patient progress. For this study, pretest and post-test data were used to compare outcomes for three cohorts: treatments performed prior to, partially during and entirely during the COVID-19 lockdown. Outcomes were compared in two large data sets: Basic MHC (N = 1392) and Specialized MHC (N = 1040).

resultsTherapeutic outcomes appeared robust for COVID-19 conditions across the three cohorts: No differences in outcomes were found between treatments that were conducted during lockdown compared to in-person treatments prior to COVID-19, or treatments which started in-person, but needed to be continued by means of videoconferencing. DISCUSSION: Videoconferencing care during the COVID-19 pandemic had similar outcomes compared to traditional in-person care. These real-world results corroborate findings of previous randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses in which videoconferencing and in-person care has been directly compared in terms of clinical effectiveness.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mental DisordersCommunicable Disease ControlHumansMental HealthNetherlandsPandemicsPhysical DistancingSARS-CoV-2Treatment OutcomeanxietyCOVID-19depressioneffectivenessvideoconferencing treatment

Identifiers

PMID35068003
PMCPMC9015637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.