eHealth interventions can be effective in treating health problems. However, adoption in inpatient routine care seems limited. The present study therefore aimed to investigate barriers and facilitators to acceptance of eHealth interventions and of online aftercare in particular in health professionals of inpatient treatment. A total of 152 out of 287 health professionals of various professional groups in four inpatient rehabilitation facilities filled out a self-administered web-based questionnaire (response rate: 53%); 128 individuals were eligible for further data analysis. Acceptance and possible predictors were investigated with a complex research model based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Acceptance of eHealth interventions was rather low (M = 2.47, SD = 0.98); however, acceptance of online aftercare was moderate (M = 3.08, SD = 0.96, t(127) = 8.22, p < .001), and eHealth literacy was elevated. Social influence, performance expectancy, and treatment-related internet and mobile use significantly predicted overall acceptance. No differences were found between professional and age groups. Although acceptance of eHealth interventions was limited in health professionals of inpatient treatment, moderate acceptance of online aftercare for work-related stress implies a basis for future implementation. Tailored eHealth education addressing misconceptions about inferiority and incongruity with conventional treatment considering the systemic aspect of acceptance formation are needed.

BackgroundWeb-based aftercare can help to stabilize treatment effects and support transition after inpatient treatment, yet uptake by patients seems limited in routine care and little is known about the mechanisms of adoption and implementation.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to (1) determine acceptance of Web-based aftercare and (2) explore its drivers and barriers in different subgroups of a mixed inpatient sample.MethodIn a cross-sectional design, 38.3% (374/977) of the inpatients from a broad spectrum of diagnostic groups (psychosomatic, cardiologic, orthopedic, pediatric, and substance-related disorders) filled out a self-administered questionnaire prior to discharge. Drivers and barriers to patients’ acceptance of Web-based aftercare were examined based on an extension to the “unified theory of acceptance and use of technology” (UTAUT). In total, 16.7% (59/353) of the participants indicated prior use of eHealth interventions.ResultsAcceptance (min 1, max 5) was low (mean 2.56, SD 1.22) and differed between diagnostic groups (Welch F4,133.10 =7.77, P<.001), with highest acceptance in adolescent patients (mean 3.46, SD 1.42). Acceptance was significantly predicted by 3 UTAUT predictors: social influence (beta=.39, P<.001), performance expectancy (beta=.31, P<.001), and effort expectancy (beta=.22, P<.001). Furthermore, stress due to permanent availability (beta=−.09, P=.01) was negatively associated with acceptance.ConclusionThis study demonstrated a limited acceptance of Web-based aftercare in inpatients. Expectations, social environment’s attitude, and negative experience with permanent availability influence eHealth acceptance. Improving implementation, therefore, means increasing eHealth experience and literacy and facilitating positive attitudes in patients and health professionals through education and reduction of misconceptions about effectiveness or usability.

Background: Depression is one of the most frequent and costly mental disorders. While there is increasing evidence for the efficacy of online self-help to improve depression or prevent relapse, there is little evidence in blended care settings, especially combined with inpatient face-to-face psychotherapy. Therefore, we evaluated whether an evidence-based online self-help program improves the efficacy of inpatient psychotherapy. Methods: A total of 229 depressed patients were randomly allocated either to an online self-help program (intervention group [IG]; Deprexis) or an active control group (CG; weekly online information on depression) in addition to inpatient psychodynamic psychotherapy. Both groups had access to their respective experimental intervention for 12 weeks, regardless of inpatient treatment duration. Reduction of depressive symptoms, as measured with the Beck Depression Inventory-II, was the primary outcome at the end of the intervention (T2). Results: Depressive symptoms were statistically significantly lower in the IG compared to the active CG at T2 with a moderate between-group effect size of d = 0.44. The same applied to anxiety (d = 0.33), quality of life (d = 0.34), and self-esteem (d = 0.38) at discharge from inpatient treatment (T1). No statistically significant differences were found regarding dysfunctional attitudes (d = 0.14) and work ability (d = 0.08) at T1. Conclusions: This is the first evidence for blended treatment combining online self-help with inpatient psychotherapy. The study opens new and promising avenues for increasing the efficacy of inpatient psychotherapy. Future studies should determine how integration of online self-help into the therapeutic process can be developed further.

Background:The aim of this longitudinal study was to determine age- and sex-standardised prevalence rates of cancer-related fatigue in different groups of patients.Methods:This was a prospective study in a cohort of N=1494 cancer patients investigating fatigue at three time points t1–t3 (t1: admission to hospital, t2: discharge, t3: half a year after t1). Fatigue was measured with the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory. Age- and sex-adjusted norms were derived from a representative community sample of N=2037, using a cutoff at the 75th percentile.Results:At admission to the hospital, 32% of the patients were classified as fatigued. At discharge, the overall prevalence rate was 40%, and at half a year after t1, prevalence was 34%. Fatigue prevalence rates differed according to tumour stage, site, age, and sex of the patients.Conclusion:The prevalence rates provided by this study can be used for the planning of research and clinical routine.

Attitudes towards OEMH are rather disadvantageous in the studied risk group. Implementation of OEMH, therefore, requires a-priori education including promotion of awareness, favorable attitudes regarding efficacy and usability in a collaborative approach.

BackgroundMental disorders have become a major health issue, and a substantial number of afflicted individuals do not get appropriate treatment. Web-based interventions are promising supplementary tools for improving health care for patients with mental disorders, as they can be delivered at low costs and used independently of time and location. Although psychodynamic treatments are used frequently in the face-to-face setting, there has been a paucity of studies on psychodynamic Web-based self-help interventions.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a transdiagnostic affect-focused psychodynamic Web-based self-help intervention designed to increase emotional competence of patients with mental disorders.MethodsA total of 82 psychotherapy inpatients with mixed diagnoses were randomized into two groups. Following discharge, the intervention group (IG) got access to a guided version of the intervention for 10 weeks. After a waiting period of 10 weeks, the wait-list control group (WLCG) got access to an unguided version of the intervention. We reported the assessments at the beginning (T0) and at the end of the intervention, resp. the waiting period (T1). The primary outcome was satisfaction with the treatment at T1. Secondary outcome measures included emotional competence, depression, anxiety, and quality of life. Statistical analyses were performed with descriptive statistics (primary outcome) and analysis of covariance; a repeated measurement analysis of variance was used for the secondary outcomes. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen d and data were analyzed as per protocol, as well as intention-to-treat (ITT).ResultsPatients were chronically ill, diagnosed with multiple diagnoses, most frequently with depression (84%, 58/69), anxiety (68%, 47/69), personality disorder (38%, 26/69), and depersonalization-derealization disorder (22%, 15/69). A majority of the patients (86%, 36/42) logged into the program, of which 86% (31/36) completed the first unit. Satisfaction with the units mastered was rated as good (52%, 16/31) and very good (26%, 9/31). However, there was a steady decline of participation over the course of the program; only 36% of the participants (13/36) participated throughout the trial completing at least 50% of the sessions. According to the ITT analysis, participants improved statistically significantly and with moderate effect sizes (Cohen d) compared with the WLCG regarding depression (d=0.60), quality of life (d=0.53), and emotional competence (d=0.49). Effects were considerably stronger for the completers with respect to depression (d=1.33), quality of life (d=0.83), emotional competence (d=0.68), and general anxiety (d=0.62).ConclusionsAlthough overall program satisfaction and benefit of the program were favorable with respect to the indicators of emotional disorders, the rate of completion was low. Our findings point to the need to target the intervention more specifically to the needs and capabilities of participants and to the co...

STPP is an effective treatment of a broad range of depressive conditions in breast cancer patients improving depression and functional QoL. Findings are limited by the drop-out rate (∼1/3) and delayed post-treatment assessments. Future trials may consider stepped-care approaches, tailored to patients' needs and requirements in the acute treatment phase.

The objective of the study was to assess the impact of low-vision aids on quality of life. Interviews included a modified version of the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (Modified German NEI VFQ-25), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Mini-Mental State Examination Blind, and Indicators of the Rehabilitation Status. These were conducted before and 5 months after low-vision rehabilitation that involved recommendation of devices and instructing patients on how to use them. Of a total of 88 patients interviewed before low-vision rehabilitation, 50 patients could be reached for the follow-up interview. A huge proportion of the sample reported clinically significant depression (30%) or anxiety (30%). There were no differences between participants or dropouts. After fitting of low-vision devices, patients reported a significant improvement in perceived near tasks (P<0.01), social functioning (P<0.01), and reading ability (P<0.001). The magnitude of change was moderate. No significant changes were found in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Mini-Mental State Examination Blind, and Indicators of the Rehabilitation Status. Low-vision rehabilitation appears to have a broader effect than simply improving visual performance, as it may positively influence social functioning. Even though this study had no control group, the influence of low-vision aids on social functioning has not been reported before and should encourage their use.