首页> 外文期刊>JMIR Mental Health >Acceptance and Expectations of Medical Experts, Students, and Patients Toward Electronic Mental Health Apps: Cross-Sectional Quantitative and Qualitative Survey Study
【24h】

Acceptance and Expectations of Medical Experts, Students, and Patients Toward Electronic Mental Health Apps: Cross-Sectional Quantitative and Qualitative Survey Study

机译:医疗专家,学生和患者对电子心理健康的验收和期望:横断面定量和定性调查研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background The acceptability of electronic mental (e-mental) health apps has already been studied. However, the attitudes of medical experts, students, and patients taking into account their knowledge of and previous experiences with e-mental health apps have not been investigated. Objective The aim of this study was to explore the attitudes, expectations, and concerns of medical experts, including physicians, psychotherapists and nursing staff, students of medicine or psychology, and patients toward e-mental health apps when considering their knowledge of and former experiences with e-mental health apps. Methods This cross-sectional quantitative and qualitative survey was based on a self-developed questionnaire. A total of 269 participants were included (104 experts, 80 students, and 85 patients), and 124 eligible participants answered a paper version and 145 answered an identical online version of the questionnaire. The measures focused on existing knowledge of and experiences with e-mental health apps, followed by a question on whether electronic health development was generally accepted or disliked. Further, we asked about the expectations for an ideal e-mental health app and possible concerns felt by the participants. All items were either presented on a 5-point Likert scale or as multiple-choice questions. Additionally, 4 items were presented as open text fields. Results Although 33.7% (35/104) of the experts, 15.0% (12/80) of the students, and 41.2% (35/85) of the patients knew at least one e-mental health app, few had already tried one (9/104 experts [8.7%], 1/80 students [1.3%], 22/85 patients [25.9%]). There were more advocates than skeptics in each group (advocates: 71/104 experts [68.3%], 50/80 students [62.5%], 46/85 patients [54.1%]; skeptics: 31/104 experts [29.8%], 20/80 students [25.0%], 26/85 patients [30.6%]). The experts, in particular, believed, that e-mental health apps will gain importance in the future (mean 1.08, SD 0.68; 95% CI 0.94-1.21). When asked about potential risks, all groups reported slight concerns regarding data security (mean 0.85, SD 1.09; 95% CI 0.72-0.98). Patient age was associated with several attitudes toward e-mental health apps (future expectations: r=–0.31, P =.005; total risk score: r=0.22, P =.05). Attitudes toward e-mental health apps correlated negatively with the professional experience of the experts (rsubs/sub(94)=–0.23, P =.03). Conclusions As opposed to patients, medical experts and students lack knowledge of and experience with e-mental health apps. If present, the experiences were assessed positively. However, experts show a more open-minded attitude with less fear of risks. Although some risks were perceived regarding data security, the attitudes and expectations of all groups were rather positive. Older patients and medical experts with long professional experience tend to express more skepticism.Trial RegistrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00013095; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013095.
机译:背景技术已经研究了电子心理(电子心理)健康应用的可接受性。但是,尚未调查医学专家,学生和患者的态度,尚未考虑其知识和以前的电子心理健康应用程序的经验。目的本研究的目的是探讨医学专家的态度,期望和关切,包括医生,心理治疗师和护理人员,医学或心理学的学生,以及在考虑他们对和以前经历的知识时,患者对电子心理健康的应用程序使用电子心理健康应用程序。方法采用这种横断面定量和定性调查是基于自我开发的问卷。共有269名参与者(104名专家,80名学生和85名患者),124名符合条件的参与者回答了纸张版本,145号回答了调查问卷的相同在线版本。这些措施侧重于现有知识和经验与电子心理健康应用程序,其次是关于电子健康发展是否普遍接受或不喜欢的问题。此外,我们询问了参与者感受到理想的电子心理健康应用的期望和可能的担忧。所有项目都呈现在5分Likert秤或多项选择题中。此外,还有4个项目作为打开的文本字段。结果虽然专家的33.7%(35/104),15.0%(12/80)的学生,41.2%(35/85)患者至少知道至少一个电子心理健康应用程序,很少有人尝试过(9/104专家[8.7%],1/80学生[1.3%],22/85患者[25.9%])。每个集团的怀疑论者有更多的倡导者(倡导者:71/104专家[68.3%],50/80学生[62.5%],46/85患者[54.1%];怀疑论者:31/104专家[29.8%], 20/80学生[25.0%],26/85患者[30.6%])。专家尤其认为,电子心理健康应用将在未来重视(平均1.08,SD 0.68; 95%CI 0.94-1.21)。当被问及潜在风险时,所有组都报告了关于数据安全的轻微问题(平均值0.85,SD 1.09; 95%CI 0.72-0.98)。患者年龄与对电子心理健康应用的几种态度有关(未来期望:r = -0.31,p = .005;总风险得分:r = 0.22,p = .05)。对电子心理健康应用的态度与专家的专业经验负相关(R S (94)= - 0.23,P = .03)。结论与患者相反,医学专家和学生缺乏对电子心理健康应用的知识和经验。如果存在,那么积极评估经验。然而,专家们表现出更为开放的态度,对风险的恐惧较少。虽然有些风险是关于数据安全的,但所有群体的态度和期望都是相当积极的。专业经验的老年患者和医学专家往往表达更令人怀疑的人.TRIAD登记委员会临床试验登记DRKS00013095; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do? navigationId=trial.html&trial_id=drks00013095。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号