EHealth interventions can be effective in treating health problems. However, adoption in inpatient routine care seems limited. The present study therefore aimed to investigate barriers and facilitators to acceptance of eHealth interventions and of online aftercare in particular in health professionals of inpatient treatment. A total of 152 out of 287 health professionals of various professional groups in four inpatient rehabilitation facilities filled out a self-administered web-based questionnaire (response rate: 53%); 128 individuals were eligible for further data analysis. Acceptance and possible predictors were investigated with a complex research model based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Acceptance of eHealth interventions was rather low (M = 2.47, SD = 0.98); however, acceptance of online aftercare was moderate (M = 3.08, SD = 0.96, t(127) = 8.22, p < .001), and eHealth literacy was elevated. Social influence, performance expectancy, and treatment-related internet and mobile use significantly predicted overall acceptance. No differences were found between professional and age groups. Although acceptance of eHealth interventions was limited in health professionals of inpatient treatment, moderate acceptance of online aftercare for work-related stress implies a basis for future implementation. Tailored eHealth education addressing misconceptions about inferiority and incongruity with conventional treatment considering the systemic aspect of acceptance formation are needed.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

Background: Depression is one of the most frequent and costly mental disorders. While there is increasing evidence for the efficacy of online self-help to improve depression or prevent relapse, there is little evidence in blended care settings, especially combined with inpatient face-to-face psychotherapy. Therefore, we evaluated whether an evidence-based online self-help program improves the efficacy of inpatient psychotherapy. Methods: A total of 229 depressed patients were randomly allocated either to an online self-help program (intervention group [IG]; Deprexis) or an active control group (CG; weekly online information on depression) in addition to inpatient psychodynamic psychotherapy. Both groups had access to their respective experimental intervention for 12 weeks, regardless of inpatient treatment duration. Reduction of depressive symptoms, as measured with the Beck Depression Inventory-II, was the primary outcome at the end of the intervention (T2). Results: Depressive symptoms were statistically significantly lower in the IG compared to the active CG at T2 with a moderate between-group effect size of d = 0.44. The same applied to anxiety (d = 0.33), quality of life (d = 0.34), and self-esteem (d = 0.38) at discharge from inpatient treatment (T1). No statistically significant differences were found regarding dysfunctional attitudes (d = 0.14) and work ability (d = 0.08) at T1. Conclusions: This is the first evidence for blended treatment combining online self-help with inpatient psychotherapy. The study opens new and promising avenues for increasing the efficacy of inpatient psychotherapy. Future studies should determine how integration of online self-help into the therapeutic process can be developed further.

The aim of this longitudinal study was to determine age- and sex-standardised prevalence rates of cancer-related fatigue in different groups of patients. This was a prospective study in a cohort of N=1494 cancer patients investigating fatigue at three time points t1–t3 (t1: admission to hospital, t2: discharge, t3: half a year after t1). Fatigue was measured with the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory. Age- and sex-adjusted norms were derived from a representative community sample of N=2037, using a cutoff at the 75th percentile. At admission to the hospital, 32% of the patients were classified as fatigued. At discharge, the overall prevalence rate was 40%, and at half a year after t1, prevalence was 34%. Fatigue prevalence rates differed according to tumour stage, site, age, and sex of the patients. The prevalence rates provided by this study can be used for the planning of research and clinical routine.

Depersonalization-derealization syndrome (DDS) is an underdiagnosed and underresearched clinical phenomenon. In Germany, its administrative prevalence is far below the threshold for orphan diseases, although according to epidemiological surveys the diagnosis should be comparable frequent as anorexia nervosa for instance. Against this background, we carried out a large comprehensive survey of a DDS series in a tertiary mental health center with a specialized depersonalization-derealization clinic. To reveal differential characteristics, we compared the DDS patients, who consulted the specialized depersonalization-derealization clinic, with a group of patients with depressive disorders without comorbid DDS from the regular outpatient clinic of the mental health center. The sample comprised 223 patients with a diagnosis of depersonalization-derealization-syndrome and 1129 patients with a depressive disorder but without a comorbid diagnosis of DDS. DDS patients were described and compared with depressive outpatients in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, treatment history, treatment wishes, clinical symptomatology, prevailing psychosocial stressors, family history of common mental disorders and history of childhood trauma. Despite the high comorbidity of DDS patients with depressive disorders and comparable burden with symptoms of depression and anxiety, the clinical picture and course of both patient groups differed strongly. DDS patients were younger, had a significant preponderance of male sex, longer disease duration and an earlier age of onset, a higher education but were more often unemployed. They tended to show more severe functional impairment. They had higher rates of previous or current mental health care utilization. Nearly all DDS patients endorsed the wish for a symptom specific counseling and 70.7 % were interested in the internet-based treatment of their problems. DDS patients had lower levels of self-rated traumatic childhood experiences and current psychosocial stressors. However, they reported a family history of anxiety disorders more often. In consideration of the selection bias of this study, this case series supports the view that the course of the DDS tends to be long-lasting. DDS patients are severely impaired, utilizing mental health care to a high degree, which nevertheless might not meet their treatment needs, as patients strongly opt for obtaining disorder specific counseling. In view of the size of the problem, more research on the disorder, its course and its optimal treatment is urgently required.

The survey aimed to investigate the prevalence of depersonalization (DP) experiences, its sociodemographic characteristics and its associations with medical conditions, illness behavior, and potential etiologic factors. A representative face-to-face household survey was conducted. The sample consists of n = 1,287 participants aged 14 to 90 years. Sociodemographic variables, medical conditions, current mental disorders, health care utilization, and childhood adversities were assessed. A total of 1.9% participants scored in the range of clinically significant DP (DP-C) and 9.7% reported at least some impairment through DP (DP-I). DP-C/DP-I were strongly associated with depression and anxiety. After adjustment for depression and anxiety, DP-C and DP-I were independently associated with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic pulmonary disease, severe pain, and childhood adversities. We conclude that DP is common, it can not be reduced to a negligible variant of depression or anxiety and that more awareness about DP with respect to detection and research is urgently required.