The Empirical Evidence for Telemedicine Interventions in Mental Disorders
The Empirical Evidence for Telemedicine Interventions in Mental Disorders
复制标题
DOI：
10.1089/tmj.2015.0206
复制
发表时间：
2016-02-01
影响因子：
4.7
通讯作者：
Yellowlees, Peter M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bashshur, Rashid L.;Shannon, Gary W.;Yellowlees, Peter M.
问题与目标：这项研究源于几个因素的汇合，即，一系列复杂的心理健康问题在年龄，社会，种族和经济群体中的流行，心理健康专业人员的日益严重短缺以及人口中相关的残疾和生产力损失，以及远程健康（TMH）改善这些问题的潜力。关于远程医疗应用和干预的真正优点的可靠信息现在对政策制定者、护理提供者、研究人员、付款人、程序开发人员和广大公众至关重要。这对于合理决策、审慎的资源分配决定和知情的战略规划是必要的。这篇文章的目的是评估国家的科学知识的优点远程医疗干预治疗精神障碍（TMH）的可行性/接受，对药物治疗的依从性，健康结果和成本的影响。材料与方法：我们首先广泛搜集有关研究，并详细研究符合纳入准则的研究内容。仅纳入符合严格方法标准的研究。必要的细节包括干预的具体性质和内容、研究方法、临床重点、技术配置和干预方式。结果如下：关于TMH的已发表科学文献揭示了这种护理方式的可行性及其预期用户的接受度的强有力和一致的证据，以及在广泛的人口统计学和诊断组中患者的神经病学和生活质量改善的统一指示。同样，在节省费用方面也显示出积极的趋势。结论：有大量的经验证据支持在精神障碍患者中使用远程医疗干预。
Problem and Objective: This research derives from the confluence of several factors, namely, the prevalence of a complex array of mental health issues across age, social, ethnic, and economic groups, an increasingly critical shortage of mental health professionals and the associated disability and productivity loss in the population, and the potential of telemental health (TMH) to ameliorate these problems. Definitive information regarding the true merit of telemedicine applications and intervention is now of paramount importance among policymakers, providers of care, researchers, payers, program developers, and the public at large. This is necessary for rational policymaking, prudent resource allocation decisions, and informed strategic planning. This article is aimed at assessing the state of scientific knowledge regarding the merit of telemedicine interventions in the treatment of mental disorders (TMH) in terms of feasibility/acceptance, effects on medication compliance, health outcomes, and cost. Materials and Methods: We started by casting a wide net to identify the relevant studies and to examine in detail the content of studies that met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. Only studies that met rigorous methodological criteria were included. Necessary details include the specific nature and content of the intervention, the research methodology, clinical focus, technological configuration, and the modality of the intervention. Results: The published scientific literature on TMH reveals strong and consistent evidence of the feasibility of this modality of care and its acceptance by its intended users, as well as uniform indication of improvement in symptomology and quality of life among patients across a broad range of demographic and diagnostic groups. Similarly, positive trends are shown in terms of cost savings. Conclusion: There is substantial empirical evidence for supporting the use of telemedicine interventions in patients with mental disorders.