Search

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telemedicine as a way to reduce COVID-19 infections was noted and consequently deregulated. However, the degree of telemedicine regulation varies from country to country, which may alter the widespread use of telemedicine. This study aimed to clarify the telepsychiatry regulations for each collaborating country/region before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe used snowball sampling within a global network of international telepsychiatry experts. Thirty collaborators from 17 different countries/regions responded to a questionnaire on barriers to the use and implementation of telepsychiatric care, including policy factors such as regulations and reimbursement at the end of 2019 and as of May 2020.ResultsThirteen of 17 regions reported a relaxation of regulations due to the pandemic; consequently, all regions surveyed stated that telepsychiatry was now possible within their public healthcare systems. In some regions, restrictions on prescription medications allowed via telepsychiatry were eased, but in 11 of the 17 regions, there were still restrictions on prescribing medications via telepsychiatry. Lower insurance reimbursement amounts for telepsychiatry consultations v. in-person consultations were reevaluated in four regions, and consequently, in 15 regions telepsychiatry services were reimbursed at the same rate (or higher) than in-person consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsOur results confirm that, due to COVID-19, the majority of countries surveyed are altering telemedicine regulations that had previously restricted the spread of telemedicine. These findings provide information that could guide future policy and regulatory decisions, which facilitate greater scale and spread of telepsychiatry globally.

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telemedicine as a way to reduce COVID-19 infections was noted and consequently deregulated. However, the degree of telemedicine regulation varies from country to country, which may alter the widespread use of telemedicine. This study aimed to clarify the telepsychiatry regulations for each collaborating country/region before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe used snowball sampling within a global network of international telepsychiatry experts. Thirty collaborators from 17 different countries/regions responded to a questionnaire on barriers to the use and implementation of telepsychiatric care, including policy factors such as regulations and reimbursement at the end of 2019 and as of May 2020.ResultsThirteen of 17 regions reported a relaxation of regulations due to the pandemic; consequently, all regions surveyed stated that telepsychiatry was now possible within their public healthcare systems. In some regions, restrictions on prescription medications allowed via telepsychiatry were eased, but in 11 of the 17 regions, there were still restrictions on prescribing medications via telepsychiatry. Lower insurance reimbursement amounts for telepsychiatry consultations v. in-person consultations were reevaluated in four regions, and consequently, in 15 regions telepsychiatry services were reimbursed at the same rate (or higher) than in-person consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsOur results confirm that, due to COVID-19, the majority of countries surveyed are altering telemedicine regulations that had previously restricted the spread of telemedicine. These findings provide information that could guide future policy and regulatory decisions, which facilitate greater scale and spread of telepsychiatry globally.

Introduction: Despite a good evidence base for telepsychiatry (TP), economic cost analyses are infrequent and vary in quality. Methods: A scoping review was conducted based on the research question, "From the perspective of an economic cost analysis for telehealth and telepsychiatry, what are the most meaningful ways to ensure a study/intervention improved clinical care, provided value to participants, had population level impact, and is sustainable?" The search in seven databases focused on keywords in four concept areas: (1) economic cost analysis, (2) evaluation, (3) telehealth and telepsychiatry, and (4) quantifiable health status outcomes. The authors reviewed the full-text articles based on the inclusion (Medical Subject Headings [MeSH] of the keywords) and exclusion criteria. Results: Of a total of 2,585 potential references, a total of 99 articles met the inclusion criteria. The evaluation of telehealth and TP has focused on access, quality, patient outcomes, feasibility, effectiveness, outcomes, and cost. Cost-effectiveness, cost–benefit, and other analytic models are more common with telehealth than TP studies, and these studies show favorable clinical, quality of life, and economic impact. A standard framework for economic cost analysis should include: an economist for planning, implementation, and evaluation; a tool kit or guideline; comprehensive analysis (e.g., cost-effectiveness or cost–benefit) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; measures for health, quality of life, and utility outcomes for populations; methods to convert outcomes into economic benefits (e.g., monetary, quality of adjusted life year); broad perspective (e.g., societal perspective); sensitivity analysis for uncertainty in modeling; and adjustments for differential timing (e.g., discounting and future costs). Conclusions: Technology assessment and economic cost analysis—such as effectiveness and implementation science approaches—contribute to clinical, training, research, and other organizational missions. More research is needed with a framework that enables comparisons across studies and meta-analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Telepsychiatry has become more widely accepted and practiced due to the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A recent study by Dr. Taishiro Kishimoto and colleagues examined the effectiveness of using two-way video for treating depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. The study found that two-way video treatment was noninferior to traditional face-to-face interventions, as measured by the SF-36 Mental Component Summary score. The study also found no differences in working alliance or client satisfaction between the two groups. These findings support the integration of telepsychiatry as a feasible and effective form of healthcare, particularly for patients who face barriers to accessing in-person services. However, further research is needed to address economic considerations and digital health equity, as well as to adapt telepsychiatry to different healthcare systems and contexts. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Psychiatry is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Residents of Northern Ontario have limited access to local psychiatric care. To address this, three program models exist: (1) telepsychiatry; (2) psychiatrists traveling to underserved areas; and (3) reimbursing patients for travel to a psychiatrist. Evidence shows that telepsychiatry has comparable outcomes to in-person consultations. The objective of this study was to determine the cost difference between programs.Methods: A cost-minimization analysis estimating cost per visit from a public healthcare payer economic costing perspective was conducted. Data on fixed and variable costs were obtained. Evidence-based assumptions were made where relevant. Base-case scenarios and a break-even analysis were completed, as well as deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, to explore the effects of parameter variability on program costs.Results: Costs per visit were lowest in telepsychiatry (CAD$360) followed by traveling physicians (CAD$558) and patient reimbursement (CAD$620). Among the 100,000 Monte Carlo simulations, results showed telepsychiatry was the least costly program in 71.2% of the simulations, while the reimbursement and outreach programs were least costly in 15.1% and 13.7% of simulations, respectively. The break-even analysis found telepsychiatry was the least costly program after an annual patient visit threshold of approximately 76 visits (compared to traveling psychiatrists) and 126 visits (compared to reimbursed patients).Discussion: Our analyses support telepsychiatry as the least costly program. These results have important implications for program planning, including the prioritization of telepsychiatry, increased integration of telepsychiatry with other modalities of outreach psychiatry, and limiting use of the patient remuneration program to where medically necessary, to reduce overall cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Rural areas in Ontario have fewer psychiatrists, making access to specialist mental health care challenging. Our objective was to characterise psychiatrists delivering and patients receiving telepsychiatry in Ontario and to determine the number of patients who accessed a psychiatrist via telepsychiatry following discharge from psychiatric hospitalisation.Method: We conducted a serial panel study to evaluate the characteristics of psychiatrists providing telepsychiatry from April 2007 to March 2013. In addition, we conducted a cross-sectional study for fiscal year 2012-2013 to examine telepsychiatry patient characteristics and create an in-need patient cohort of individuals with a recent psychiatric hospitalisation that assessed if they had follow-up with a psychiatrist in person or through telepsychiatry within 1 year of discharge.Results: In fiscal year 2012-2013, a total of 3801 people had 5635 telepsychiatry visits, and 7% ( n = 138) of Ontario psychiatrists provided telepsychiatry. Of the 48,381 people identified as in need of psychiatric care, 60% saw a local psychiatrist, 39% saw no psychiatrist, and less than 1% saw a psychiatrist through telepsychiatry only or telepsychiatry in addition to local psychiatry within a year. Three northern regions had more than 50% of in-need patients fail to access psychiatry within 1 year.Conclusions: Currently, relatively few patients and psychiatrists use telepsychiatry. In addition, patients scarcely access telepsychiatry for posthospitalisation follow-up. This study, which serves as a preliminary baseline for telepsychiatry in Ontario, demonstrates that telepsychiatry has not evolved systematically to address need and highlights the importance of system-level planning when implementing telepsychiatry to optimise access to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A foundational assessment of learning needs is missing from previous reports of telepsychiatry curricula. We used an in-depth needs assessment to identify specific skills required for the practice of effective telepsychiatry, and provide an evidence base to guide the development of telepsychiatry curricula in postgraduate psychiatry training. Many of these skills set telepsychiatry apart from practice in traditional face-to-face clinical settings, or result from adaptations to clinical practice to meet the needs of a telepsychiatry interface in patient care. Methods: We used a qualitative, modified grounded theory approach to gain insight into areas of importance for telepsychiatry training in postgraduate psychiatry residency. 16 interviews of faculty and residents (9 and 7 interviews, respectively), allowed participants to reflect on their experiences in telepsychiatry. Data were then thematically analyzed. Results: Interview respondents identified important aspects of the context for telepsychiatry training; the skills required to competently practice telepsychiatry; and the desired teaching and learning methods for acquiring these skills. Specific domains of competency were identified: technical skills; assessment skills; relational skills and communication; collaborative and interprofessional skills; administrative skills; medico-legal skills; community psychiatry and community-specific knowledge; cultural psychiatry skills, including knowledge of Indigenous cultures; and, knowledge of health systems. The skills identified in this study map well to competency- based medical education frameworks. Conclusions: Telepsychiatry is increasingly being adopted as a solution to health systems problems such as regional disparities in access to care, and it requires explicit competency development. Ensuring adequate and quality exposure to telepsychiatry during residency training could positively impact our health systems and health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Telepsychiatry (TP; video; synchronous) is effective, well received and a standard way to practice. Best practices in TP education, but not its desired outcomes, have been published. This paper proposes competencies for trainees and clinicians, with TP situated within the broader landscape of e-mental health (e-MH) care. TP competencies are organized using the US Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education framework, with input from the CanMEDS framework. Teaching and assessment methods are aligned with target competencies, learning contexts, and evaluation options. Case examples help to apply concepts to clinical and institutional contexts. Competencies can be identified, measured and evaluated. Novice or advanced beginner, competent/proficient, and expert levels were outlined. Andragogical (i.e. pedagogical) methods are used in clinical care, seminar, and other educational contexts. Cross-sectional and longitudinal evaluation using quantitative and qualitative measures promotes skills development via iterative feedback from patients, trainees, and faculty staff. TP and e-MH care significantly overlap, such that institutional leaders may use a common approach for change management and an e-platform to prioritize resources. TP training and assessment methods need to be implemented and evaluated. Institutional approaches to patient care, education, faculty development, and funding also need to be studied. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Telepsychiatry is an increasingly used model of mental health care that connects patients with psychiatrists at a distance via videoconference. Telepsychiatry is an effective clinical intervention that improves access to quality care in regions with limited resources or in clinical situations where in-person care is unavailable.Objective: This study aims to develop a validated survey tool to measure patient experience and satisfaction with telepsychiatry based on the quality of care domains. This study also seeks to understand which health service outcomes were most strongly correlated with overall satisfaction in the context of telepsychiatry.Methods: The survey created in this study was developed and validated with a panel of subject matter and process experts and was piloted with 274 patients who received clinical consultations through the TeleMental Health Program at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Factor analysis was used to determine correlations between questions and quality of care domains and was also used to assess model fit.Results: The study provides a validated survey to measure patient satisfaction and experience with telepsychiatry across 4 domains: access and timeliness, appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety. Both safety and access and timeliness were found to be statistically significant predictors of satisfaction in our sample.Conclusions: By situating patient satisfaction and experience within this framework, the survey facilitates patient data collection and interpretation through a clinical quality lens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While most patients with depression, anxiety, or at-risk drinking receive care exclusively in primary care settings, primary care providers experience challenges in diagnosing and treating these common problems. Over the past two decades, the collaborative care model has addressed these challenges. However, this model has been adopted very slowly due to the high costs of care managers; inability to sustain their role in small practices; and the perceived lack of relevance of interventions focused on a specific psychiatric diagnosis. Thus, we designed an innovative randomized clinical trial (RCT), the Primary Care Assessment and Research of a Telephone Intervention for Neuropsychiatric Conditions with Education and Resources study (PARTNERs). This RCT compared the outcomes of enhanced usual care and a novel model of collaborative care in primary care patients with depressive disorders, generalized anxiety, social phobia, panic disorder, at-risk drinking, or alcohol use disorders. These conditions were selected because they are present in almost a third of patients seen in primary care settings. Innovations included assigning the care manager role to trained lay providers supported by computer-based tools; providing all care management centrally by phone - i.e., the intervention was delivered without any face-to-face contact between the patient and the care team; and basing patient eligibility and treatment selection on a transdiagnostic approach using the same eligibility criteria and the same treatment algorithms regardless of the participants' specific psychiatric diagnosis. This paper describes the design of this RCT and discusses the rationale for its main design features. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]