Search

The COVID-19 outbreak has raised questions about how vulnerable groups experience the pandemic. Research that focuses on the view of individuals with pre-existing mental health conditions is still limited, and so are cross-country comparative surveys. We gathered our sample of qualitative data during the first lockdown after governmental measures against the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus came into force in Austria, Czechia, Germany, and Slovakia. A total of n = 1690 psychotherapists from four middle European countries answered the question of how the COVID-19 pandemic was addressed in sessions by their patients during the early stage of unprecedented public health conditions. We employed a descriptive qualitative methodology to determine themes following levels of the social-ecological model (SEM) regarding how the COVID-19 pandemic affected patients. At the public policy level, stressful environmental conditions concerned the governmental mitigation efforts. At the level of community/society, reported key themes were employment, restricted access to educational and health facilities, socioeconomic consequences, and the pandemic itself. Key themes at the interpersonal level regarded forced proximity, the possibility of infection of loved ones, childcare, and homeschooling. Key themes at the individual level were the possibility of contracting COVID-19, having to stay at home/isolation, and a changing environment. Within the SEM framework, adaptive and maladaptive responses to these stressors were reported, with more similarities than differences between the countries. A quantification of word stems showed that the maladaptive reactions predominated.

ZusammenfassungDie Donau-Universität Krems untersuchte in Kooperation mit dem Österreichischen Bundesverband für Psychotherapie mit drei Onlinebefragungen Psychotherapie auf Distanz in Österreich während der COVID-19-Pandemie. Dieser Artikel fasst die bisherigen bereits publizierten Ergebnisse dieser Befragungen zusammen. An der ersten Onlinebefragung, welche in den ersten Wochen des ersten coronabedingten Lockdowns in Österreich stattfand, beteiligten sich insgesamt 1547 Psychotherapeut*innen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Psychotherapeut*innen während des Lockdowns Psychotherapie im persönlichen Kontakt verstärkt durch Psychotherapie auf Distanz (Telefon oder Internet) ersetzten. Ein erhöhtes Stresserleben sowie jobbezogene Ängste waren v. a. bei Psychotherapeut*innen vorhanden, bei denen Psychotherapie die einzige Einnahmequelle darstellte. Die Erfahrungen mit Psychotherapie auf Distanz wurden als insgesamt positiver beschrieben als sie erwartet wurden. Nichtsdestotrotz wurde Psychotherapie auf Distanz als nicht vollständig vergleichbar mit Psychotherapie im persönlichen Kontakt angesehen. An einer zweiten Onlinebefragung nach dem ersten Lockdown (Sommer 2020) beteiligten sich 222 Psychotherapeut*innen aus Österreich. Ziel dieser Befragung war es den Wechsel des Behandlungsformats (persönlich zu digital oder digital zu persönlich) im Hinblick auf die Anwendung spezifischer therapeutischer Interventionen genauer zu untersuchen. Unter digital wurden verschiede Medien wie z. B. Sprachtelefonie, Videokonferenz, Chats und E‑Mail subsumiert. Zeitgleich mit der zweiten Befragung wurde eine dritte Onlinebefragung durchgeführt, an der 139 Patient*innen der 222 österreichischen Psychotherapeut*innen teilnahmen, um auch die Patient*innen-Perspektive beim Wechsel des Behandlungsformats zu untersuchen. Erste Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Psychotherapeut*innen und Patient*innen beim Wechsel des Behandlungsformats einen Unterschied hinsichtlich der angewandten therapeutischen Interventionen erlebten. So wurden die untersuchten therapeutischen Interventionen als typischer für die Therapie im direkten persönlichen Kontakt als für die Psychotherapie auf Distanz bewertet. Zudem veränderte sich die subjektive Bedeutung verschiedener Bereiche des Lebens während der Corona-Pandemie. Die bisherigen Auswertungen zeigen, dass die COVID-19 Pandemie einen deutlichen Impact auf die Psychotherapiepraxis in Österreich hat. Weitere quantitative und qualitative Auswertungen der Daten werden noch tiefergehende Erkenntnisse liefern.

Telephone emergency service (TES) consultants have been challenged even more since the beginning of the pandemic. How the COVID-19 situation and the associated increasing demand for TES services affect the well-being and stress of TES counselors has not been assessed so far. This longitudinal study examined mental well-being (WHO-5), perceived stress level (PSS-10), and experienced job-related meaningfulness (CERES) of TES counselors at two measurement points during the pandemic. From December 2020 to January 2021 (t1), N = 374 counselors were recruited within the Austrian nationwide organization “TelefonSeelsorge”. From those, N = 108 also participated one year later at t2. Neither well-being nor perceived stress differed significantly between t1 and t2. There was a decrease in job-related meaningfulness (from 5.46 at t1 to 5.34 at t2; p < 0.001). The consultants identified loneliness and mental health as the most common problems of helpline callers at both measurement points. The results confirm a stable level of stress and well-being during the pandemic in TES consultants. However, they also show a slight decrease in perceived job-related meaningfulness. Well-being of counselors should be watched closely, as they are an important part of the psychosocial healthcare system.

Objective First, to investigate how psychotherapists and patients experience the change from in‐person to remote psychotherapy or vice versa during COVID‐19 regarding the therapeutic interventions used. Second, to explore the influence of therapeutic orientations on therapeutic interventions in in‐person versus remote psychotherapy. Method Psychotherapists (N = 217) from Austria were recruited, who in turn recruited their patients (N = 133). The therapeutic orientation of the therapists was psychodynamic (22.6%), humanistic (46.1%), systemic (20.7%) or behavioural (10.6%). All the data were collected remotely via online surveys. Therapists and patients completed two versions of the ‘Multitheoretical List of Therapeutic Interventions’ (MULTI‐30) (version 1: in‐person; version 2: remote) to investigate differences between in‐person and remote psychotherapy in the following therapeutic interventions: psychodynamic, common factors, person‐centred, process‐experiential, interpersonal, cognitive, behavioural and dialectical‐behavioural. Results Therapists rated all examined therapeutic interventions as more typical for in‐person than for remote psychotherapy. For patients, three therapeutic interventions (psychodynamic, process‐experiential, cognitive interventions) were more typical for in‐person than for remote psychotherapy after correcting for multiple testing. For two therapeutic interventions (behavioural, dialectical‐behavioural), differences between the four therapeutic orientations were more consistent for in‐person than for remote psychotherapy. Conclusions Therapeutic interventions differed between in‐person and remote psychotherapy and differences between therapeutic orientations in behavioural‐oriented interventions become indistinct in remote psychotherapy.

We assessed psychotherapists&rsquo, and patients&rsquo, ratings of their subjective perception of meaning related to different areas of life before the COVID-19 pandemic as compared to the time during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a quantitative cross-sectional study, Austrian psychotherapists (N = 222) were recruited by e-mail, who in turn recruited their patients (N = 139). Therapists and patients were asked to rate the meaning of different areas of life before as well as during the COVID-19 crisis. The psychotherapists showed an overall higher rating of the importance of areas of life compared to their patients (p &lt, 0.001). The rating of the importance of the domains of living was differently affected by the COVID-19 situation (p &lt, 0.001). While the meaning of physical and mental health during COVID-19 was rated higher than before, the opposite was observed for work (p &lt, 0.001). No differences were found for relationships and friends, as well as for hobbies. As no interactions between perspective (therapists vs. patients), area of life, and time point (before vs. during COVID-19) were observed, it can be concluded that the COVID-19 situation changed the subjective attribution of meaning concerning different aspects of life similarly in therapists as well as patients. While mental and physical health gained subjective importance, the opposite was observed for work.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has caused changes in the provision of psychotherapy around the world. The common format of delivering in-person psychotherapy is replaced by psychotherapy via the Internet to a great extent. This study examined how well Austrian psychotherapists feel informed about the use of the Internet in psychotherapy, where additional information needs exist, and which software is used. A link to an online survey was sent to all psychotherapists providing a valid email address in the official list of licensed psychotherapists at the start of the COVID-19 lockdown in Austria. A total of 1547 people took part in the survey. The results show that psychotherapy via the Internet was primarily offered via Skype and Zoom during the COVID-19 pandemic and that the majority of the therapists felt well-informed about psychotherapy via the Internet, however, several therapists stated that they wish to have further information on data protection and security. Overall, the study shows that Austrian psychotherapists coped well with the rapid change from the provision of psychotherapy through personal contact to psychotherapy via the Internet. Security and data protection aspects of therapy via the Internet should be addressed in training and further education of psychotherapists. As this study was conducted online, it might have caused some respondent bias towards a higher participation of psychotherapists with higher preference for new technologies.

Telephone emergency services play an important role in providing low-threshold, anonymous crisis intervention free of cost. The current study aims to examine the mental well-being and perceived stress level of counselors as well as the main topics of helpline callers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria. In the current study, 374 counselors were recruited within the Austrian nationwide organization TelefonSeelsorge during the second wave of COVID-19 infection in Austria. The mental well-being (WHO-5) and perceived stress-level (PSS-10) were assessed and counselors were asked about the frequency of different topics thematized by callers and changes compared to pre-pandemic times. Compared to a reference group of the Austrian general population, counselors experienced less stress (13.22 vs. 16.42) and higher mental well-being (66.26 vs. 57.36, p &lt, 0.001). The most frequent topics during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria were loneliness and mental health. More calls were registered in 2020 compared to 2019 and especially the topics loneliness, mental health, professional activities and relationships were reported to be thematized more often during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the time before (p &lt, 0.001). The results contribute to an understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on telephone crisis intervention.