Implementation Outcome Scales for Digital Mental Health (iOSDMH): Scale Development and Cross-sectional Study.
Implementation Outcome Scales for Digital Mental Health (iOSDMH): Scale Development and Cross-sectional Study.
复制标题
数字心理健康实施结果量表（iOSDMH）：量表开发和横断面研究。
DOI：
10.2196/24332
复制
发表时间：
2021-11-23
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Nishi D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sasaki N;Obikane E;Vedanthan R;Imamura K;Cuijpers P;Shimazu T;Kamada M;Kawakami N;Nishi D
数字化心理健康干预比以往任何时候都更多地用于预防和治疗心理问题。优化数字心理健康的实施方面对于向有需要的人群提供该计划至关重要，但缺乏针对数字心理健康干预措施的有效实施结果措施。本研究的主要目的是为参与实施过程的不同利益相关者（用户，提供者和管理者或政策制定者）制定数字心理健康的实施结果量表。第二个目的是为用户验证开发的量表。我们开发了英语和日语版本的数字化心理健康（iOSDMH）的实施结果量表的基础上，文献综述和小组讨论与专家在实施研究和基于网络的心理治疗。该研究开发了可接受性，适当性，可行性，满意度和伤害作为用户，提供者和管理者或政策制定者的结果措施。我们通过互联网使用UTSMeD（一个提供心理健康信息的网站）进行了循证干预（N=200）。进行探索性因素分析（EFA），以评估iOSDMH的用户的结构效度。满意度只包括一个项目，不包括在全民教育中。iOSDMH是为用户、供应商和管理人员或政策制定者开发的。iOSDMH包含19个用户项目、11个提供者项目和14个管理者或决策者项目。Cronbach α系数表明iOSDMH对用户的可接受性（α=.665）具有中等内部一致性，但适当性（α=.776）、可行性（α=.832）和危害（α=.777）具有高度一致性。全民教育揭示了3个因素的结构，表明可接受性和适当性作为密切的概念。尽管这两个概念之间的相似性，我们推断，可接受性和适当性应被用作不同的因素，根据以前的研究。我们为用户、供应商和管理人员开发了iOSDMH。心理测量评估的用户规模表现出可接受的信度和效度。评估数字化心理健康实施的组成部分是实施科学的一个重要步骤。
Digital mental health interventions are being used more than ever for the prevention and treatment of psychological problems. Optimizing the implementation aspects of digital mental health is essential to deliver the program to populations in need, but there is a lack of validated implementation outcome measures for digital mental health interventions. The primary aim of this study is to develop implementation outcome scales of digital mental health for different levels of stakeholders involved in the implementation process: users, providers, and managers or policy makers. The secondary aim is to validate the developed scale for users. We developed English and Japanese versions of the implementation outcome scales for digital mental health (iOSDMH) based on the literature review and panel discussions with experts in implementation research and web-based psychotherapy. The study developed acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, satisfaction, and harm as the outcome measures for users, providers, and managers or policy makers. We conducted evidence-based interventions via the internet using UTSMeD, a website for mental health information (N=200). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to assess the structural validity of the iOSDMH for users. Satisfaction, which consisted of a single item, was not included in the EFA. The iOSDMH was developed for users, providers, and managers or policy makers. The iOSDMH contains 19 items for users, 11 items for providers, and 14 items for managers or policy makers. Cronbach α coefficients indicated intermediate internal consistency for acceptability (α=.665) but high consistency for appropriateness (α=.776), feasibility (α=.832), and harm (α=.777) of the iOSDMH for users. EFA revealed 3-factor structures, indicating acceptability and appropriateness as close concepts. Despite the similarity between these 2 concepts, we inferred that acceptability and appropriateness should be used as different factors, following previous studies. We developed iOSDMH for users, providers, and managers. Psychometric assessment of the scales for users demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity. Evaluating the components of digital mental health implementation is a major step forward in implementation science.