Design and Delivery Features That May Improve the Use of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Children and Adolescents With Anxiety: A Realist Literature Synthesis With a Persuasive Systems Design Perspective.

adherence adolescents anxiety children cognitive behavioral therapy computer-assisted therapy internet persuasive communication review

Journal

Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
05 02 2019
Historique:
received: 25 05 2018
accepted: 20 10 2018
revised: 26 09 2018
entrez: 6 2 2019
pubmed: 6 2 2019
medline: 18 12 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) is a persuasive system as its design combines therapeutic content, technological features, and interactions between the user and the program to reduce anxiety for children and adolescents. How iCBT is designed and delivered differs across programs. Although iCBT is considered an effective approach for treating child and adolescent anxiety, rates of program use (eg, module completion) are highly variable for reasons that are not clear. As the extent to which users complete a program can impact anxiety outcomes, understanding what iCBT design and delivery features improve program use is critical for optimizing treatment effects. The objectives of this study were to use a realist synthesis approach to explore the design and delivery features of iCBT for children and adolescents with anxiety as described in the literature and to examine their relationship to program use outcomes. A search of published and gray literature was conducted up to November 2017. Prespecified inclusion criteria identified research studies, study protocols, and program websites on iCBT for child and adolescent anxiety. Literature was critically appraised for relevance and methodological rigor. The persuasive systems design (PSD) model, a comprehensive framework for designing and evaluating persuasive systems, was used to guide data extraction. iCBT program features were grouped under 4 PSD categories-Primary task support, Dialogue support, System credibility support, and Social support. iCBT design (PSD Mechanisms) and delivery features (Context of use) were linked to program use (Outcomes) using meta-ethnographic methods; these relationships were described as Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations. For our configurations, we identified key PSD features and delivery contexts that generated moderate-to-high program use based on moderate-to-high quality evidence found across multiple iCBT programs. A total of 44 documents detailing 10 iCBT programs were included. Seven iCBT programs had at least one document that scored high for relevance; most studies were of moderate-to-high methodological rigor. We developed 5 configurations that highlighted 8 PSD features (Tailoring, Personalization [Primary task supports]; Rewards, Reminders, Social role [Dialogue supports]; and Trustworthiness, Expertise, Authority [System credibility supports]) associated with moderate-to-high program use. Important features of delivery Context were adjunct support (a face-to-face, Web- or email-based communications component) and whether programs targeted the prevention or treatment of anxiety. Incorporating multiple PSD features may have additive or synergistic effects on program use. The Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations we developed suggest that, when delivered with adjunct support, certain PSD features contribute to moderate-to-high use of iCBT prevention and treatment programs for children and adolescents with anxiety. Standardization of the definition and measurement of program use, formal testing of individual and combined PSD features, and use of real-world design and testing methods are important next steps to improving how we develop and deliver increasingly useful treatments to target users.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) is a persuasive system as its design combines therapeutic content, technological features, and interactions between the user and the program to reduce anxiety for children and adolescents. How iCBT is designed and delivered differs across programs. Although iCBT is considered an effective approach for treating child and adolescent anxiety, rates of program use (eg, module completion) are highly variable for reasons that are not clear. As the extent to which users complete a program can impact anxiety outcomes, understanding what iCBT design and delivery features improve program use is critical for optimizing treatment effects.
OBJECTIVE
The objectives of this study were to use a realist synthesis approach to explore the design and delivery features of iCBT for children and adolescents with anxiety as described in the literature and to examine their relationship to program use outcomes.
METHODS
A search of published and gray literature was conducted up to November 2017. Prespecified inclusion criteria identified research studies, study protocols, and program websites on iCBT for child and adolescent anxiety. Literature was critically appraised for relevance and methodological rigor. The persuasive systems design (PSD) model, a comprehensive framework for designing and evaluating persuasive systems, was used to guide data extraction. iCBT program features were grouped under 4 PSD categories-Primary task support, Dialogue support, System credibility support, and Social support. iCBT design (PSD Mechanisms) and delivery features (Context of use) were linked to program use (Outcomes) using meta-ethnographic methods; these relationships were described as Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations. For our configurations, we identified key PSD features and delivery contexts that generated moderate-to-high program use based on moderate-to-high quality evidence found across multiple iCBT programs.
RESULTS
A total of 44 documents detailing 10 iCBT programs were included. Seven iCBT programs had at least one document that scored high for relevance; most studies were of moderate-to-high methodological rigor. We developed 5 configurations that highlighted 8 PSD features (Tailoring, Personalization [Primary task supports]; Rewards, Reminders, Social role [Dialogue supports]; and Trustworthiness, Expertise, Authority [System credibility supports]) associated with moderate-to-high program use. Important features of delivery Context were adjunct support (a face-to-face, Web- or email-based communications component) and whether programs targeted the prevention or treatment of anxiety. Incorporating multiple PSD features may have additive or synergistic effects on program use.
CONCLUSIONS
The Context-Mechanism-Outcome configurations we developed suggest that, when delivered with adjunct support, certain PSD features contribute to moderate-to-high use of iCBT prevention and treatment programs for children and adolescents with anxiety. Standardization of the definition and measurement of program use, formal testing of individual and combined PSD features, and use of real-world design and testing methods are important next steps to improving how we develop and deliver increasingly useful treatments to target users.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30720436
pii: v21i2e11128
doi: 10.2196/11128
pmc: PMC6379818
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e11128

Informations de copyright

©Ashley D Radomski, Lori Wozney, Patrick McGrath, Anna Huguet, Lisa Hartling, Michele P Dyson, Kathryn Bennett, Amanda S Newton. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 05.02.2019.

Références

J Med Internet Res. 2006 Sep 29;8(3):e20; author reply e21
pubmed: 17032636
Ann Behav Med. 2011 Apr;41(2):208-26
pubmed: 21132416
Behav Res Ther. 2017 Mar;90:41-57
pubmed: 27988427
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Apr 11;20(4):e144
pubmed: 29643048
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Nov 14;14(6):e152
pubmed: 23151820
Int J Nurs Stud. 2012 Jan;49(1):47-53
pubmed: 21835406
Br J Clin Psychol. 2010 Nov;49(Pt 4):455-71
pubmed: 19799804
J Anxiety Disord. 2015 Jan;29:83-92
pubmed: 25527900
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007 Feb;46(2):267-83
pubmed: 17242630
J Med Internet Res. 2010 Feb 17;12(1):e4
pubmed: 20164043
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82
pubmed: 23092060
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jul 10;17(7):e172
pubmed: 26163456
JMIR Ment Health. 2016 Aug 24;3(3):e39
pubmed: 27558893
PLoS One. 2010 Jun 08;5(6):e10939
pubmed: 20544030
J Youth Adolesc. 2015 Jan;44(1):90-113
pubmed: 25115460
J Affect Disord. 2014 Jul;163:125-32
pubmed: 24456837
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 Mar-Apr;16(2):171-8
pubmed: 19074300
Behav Res Ther. 2017 Mar;90:67-75
pubmed: 28012300
J Med Internet Res. 2009 Apr 24;11(2):e13
pubmed: 19403466
Behav Res Ther. 2016 Jan;76:47-56
pubmed: 26649465
J Pediatr Psychol. 2009 Jun;34(5):474-87
pubmed: 18794187
Internet Interv. 2018 Feb 19;12:1-10
pubmed: 30135763
Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Apr;46(4):529-46
pubmed: 19233357
PLoS One. 2014 May 20;9(5):e98118
pubmed: 24844847
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Feb 19;16(2):e36
pubmed: 24554442
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005 Jul;10 Suppl 1:21-34
pubmed: 16053581
J Affect Disord. 2017 Aug 15;218:260-268
pubmed: 28477505
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Apr 16;8:21
pubmed: 18416812
Cogn Behav Ther. 2009;38 Suppl 1:55-60
pubmed: 19675956
Telemed J E Health. 2014 May;20(5):419-27
pubmed: 24579913
Int J Med Inform. 2016 Dec;96:71-85
pubmed: 27117057
Trials. 2013 Mar 19;14:76
pubmed: 23506049
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2014 May;8(2):190-7
pubmed: 24251956
Internet Interv. 2018 Mar 13;12:176-180
pubmed: 30135781
Clin Psychol Rev. 2013 Dec;33(8):1134-47
pubmed: 24100081
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000 Jun;68(3):438-50
pubmed: 10883561
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Jun 28;14(3):e88
pubmed: 22789657
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Aug 09;19(8):e266
pubmed: 28793983
Games Health J. 2016 Apr;5(2):93-9
pubmed: 26812253
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Dec 06;19(12):e402
pubmed: 29212630
Behav Res Ther. 2015 Apr;67:1-18
pubmed: 25727678
Am J Prev Med. 2007 May;32(5 Suppl):S112-8
pubmed: 17466815
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Mar 10;13(1):e30
pubmed: 21393123
J Behav Med. 2017 Feb;40(1):85-98
pubmed: 28058516
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Jul 22;13(3):e46
pubmed: 21795238
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Dec 05;13(4):e111
pubmed: 22155738
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009 Dec;77(6):1021-32
pubmed: 19968379
BMJ. 2012 Apr 18;344:e2598
pubmed: 22517917
J Affect Disord. 2016 May 15;196:210-7
pubmed: 26926660
Med J Aust. 2010 Jun 7;192(S11):S12-4
pubmed: 20528700
Can J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2012 Spring;22(2):37-46
pubmed: 22803288
BMJ. 2008 Oct 22;337:a1937
pubmed: 18945728
Cogn Behav Ther. 2013;42(4):303-14
pubmed: 24245708
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Aug 01;19(8):e277
pubmed: 28765103
J Med Internet Res. 2009 Feb 23;11(1):e6
pubmed: 19275982
Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2011 Apr;20(2):217-38
pubmed: 21440852
JMIR Hum Factors. 2015 Jul 09;2(2):e12
pubmed: 27025279
Am J Prev Med. 2014 Oct;47(4):498-504
pubmed: 25092122
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2017 Feb 10;2016:994-1003
pubmed: 28269896
BMC Med. 2016 Jun 24;14(1):96
pubmed: 27342217
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006 Jun;74(3):614-21
pubmed: 16822117
Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Dec;50:1-10
pubmed: 27668988
Psychol Med. 2009 May;39(5):705-12
pubmed: 18812006
Clin Psychol Rev. 2000 Jun;20(4):509-31
pubmed: 10832552
J Affect Disord. 2013 May;147(1-3):338-44
pubmed: 23245469
J Med Internet Res. 2003 Dec 18;5(4):e32
pubmed: 14713660
J Med Internet Res. 2009 May 14;11(2):e16
pubmed: 19632970
Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2010 Sep;13(3):275-90
pubmed: 20532980
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2003 Apr;37(2):169-83
pubmed: 12656956
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:657-61
pubmed: 23920638
Internet Interv. 2017 Nov 09;12:121-129
pubmed: 30135776
Internet Interv. 2016 Aug 17;6:1-5
pubmed: 30135808
Internet Interv. 2017 Mar 22;8:48-52
pubmed: 30135828
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011 Oct;79(5):629-42
pubmed: 21744945
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Mar 09;14(2):e45
pubmed: 22532074
Clin Psychol Rev. 2009 Apr;29(3):208-15
pubmed: 19232805
Transl Behav Med. 2018 Sep 8;8(5):793-798
pubmed: 29471424
Psychother Res. 2018 Jul;28(4):643-653
pubmed: 27781568
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2004 Aug;43(8):930-59
pubmed: 15266189

Auteurs

Ashley D Radomski (AD)

Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Lori Wozney (L)

Centre for Research in Family Health, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Patrick McGrath (P)

Department of Psychology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Deparment of Psychiatry, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Anna Huguet (A)

Department of Community of Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Lisa Hartling (L)

Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Michele P Dyson (MP)

Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Kathryn Bennett (K)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Amanda S Newton (AS)

Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH