Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Evidence of Phone vs Video-Conferencing for Mental Health Treatments: A Review of the Literature
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Evidence of Phone vs Video-Conferencing for Mental Health Treatments: A Review of the Literature
Do you wish to request the book?
Evidence of Phone vs Video-Conferencing for Mental Health Treatments: A Review of the Literature
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Evidence of Phone vs Video-Conferencing for Mental Health Treatments: A Review of the Literature
2022
Overview
Purpose of Review
The goal of this paper is to provide a comparative review of using phone (audio-only) or video for mental health treatments. Our review includes evidence of phone and video’s effectiveness in terms of reduced symptomology, retention, satisfaction, therapeutic alliance, and other outcomes of interest. This review also discusses how patients and providers’ experiences and attitudes differ between these two modalities. Finally, we present information on different usage rates of phone and video across patient populations and mental health provider types, and different implementation strategies.
Recent Findings
Treatments through phone and video are both able to reduce symptoms related to mental health conditions and have both been found to be non-inferior to in-person care. Both phone and video are more convenient to patients. Video offers important visual information that can be important to diagnosing mental health conditions. Phone, however, is more broadly accessible and may come with fewer technological issues.
Summary
In the context of mental health care, where non-verbal cues are tied to symptomology and diagnosing, and a strong relationship between patient and provider can enhance treatment, we encourage the use of video, especially for psychotherapeutic services. However, as phone is more accessible, we ultimately recommend an accommodating approach, one that flexibly makes use of both phone and video. Future studies on telehealth should focus on direct, head-to-head comparisons between phone and video and conduct more rigorous testing on whether clinical differences exist.
Publisher
Springer US,Springer Nature B.V
