Young People's Satisfaction With the Online Mental Health Service eheadspace: Development and Implementation of a Service Satisfaction Measure.
adolescent
counseling
feedback
internet
mental health
satisfaction
telehealth
telemedicine
young people
Journal
JMIR mental health
ISSN: 2368-7959
Titre abrégé: JMIR Ment Health
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101658926
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Apr 2019
17 Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
24
09
2018
accepted:
19
12
2018
revised:
17
12
2018
entrez:
18
4
2019
pubmed:
18
4
2019
medline:
18
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Online youth mental health services are an expanding approach to meeting service need and can be used as the first step in a stepped-care approach. However, limited evidence exists regarding satisfaction with online services, and there is no standardized service satisfaction measure. This study implemented an online youth mental health service satisfaction questionnaire within eheadspace, an online youth mental health service. The aims were to test the questionnaire's psychometric properties and identify current levels of satisfaction among service users, as well as to identify client and service contact characteristics that affect satisfaction. Data were collected from 2280 eheadspace clients via an online questionnaire advertised and accessed through the eheadspace service platform between September 2016 and February 2018. Client and service contact characteristics, potential outcomes, and session and service feedback data were collected. The service satisfaction questionnaire demonstrated high internal consistency for the overall satisfaction scale (alpha=.95) and its three subscales: session satisfaction, potential outcomes, and service satisfaction. A three-factor model was the best fit to the data, although including a higher order unidimensional construct of overall satisfaction was also a reasonable fit. Overall, young people were very satisfied with eheadspace (mean 3.60, SD 0.83). Service characteristics, but not client characteristics, were significantly associated with satisfaction. Young people were more satisfied with eheadspace when they had greater engagement as evident through receiving esupport rather than briefer service provision, having a longer session and greater interaction with the clinician, and not previously attending a face-to-face headspace center. The online youth mental health service satisfaction questionnaire developed for and implemented in eheadspace showed good psychometric properties. The measure is brief, has good internal consistency, and has a clear factor structure. The measure could be adapted for use in other online youth mental health services. The young people using eheadspace and completing the feedback survey were highly satisfied. Greater engagement with the online service was shown to be associated with greater satisfaction. No specific client demographic groups were shown to be more or less satisfied.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Online youth mental health services are an expanding approach to meeting service need and can be used as the first step in a stepped-care approach. However, limited evidence exists regarding satisfaction with online services, and there is no standardized service satisfaction measure.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study implemented an online youth mental health service satisfaction questionnaire within eheadspace, an online youth mental health service. The aims were to test the questionnaire's psychometric properties and identify current levels of satisfaction among service users, as well as to identify client and service contact characteristics that affect satisfaction.
METHODS
METHODS
Data were collected from 2280 eheadspace clients via an online questionnaire advertised and accessed through the eheadspace service platform between September 2016 and February 2018. Client and service contact characteristics, potential outcomes, and session and service feedback data were collected.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The service satisfaction questionnaire demonstrated high internal consistency for the overall satisfaction scale (alpha=.95) and its three subscales: session satisfaction, potential outcomes, and service satisfaction. A three-factor model was the best fit to the data, although including a higher order unidimensional construct of overall satisfaction was also a reasonable fit. Overall, young people were very satisfied with eheadspace (mean 3.60, SD 0.83). Service characteristics, but not client characteristics, were significantly associated with satisfaction. Young people were more satisfied with eheadspace when they had greater engagement as evident through receiving esupport rather than briefer service provision, having a longer session and greater interaction with the clinician, and not previously attending a face-to-face headspace center.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The online youth mental health service satisfaction questionnaire developed for and implemented in eheadspace showed good psychometric properties. The measure is brief, has good internal consistency, and has a clear factor structure. The measure could be adapted for use in other online youth mental health services. The young people using eheadspace and completing the feedback survey were highly satisfied. Greater engagement with the online service was shown to be associated with greater satisfaction. No specific client demographic groups were shown to be more or less satisfied.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30994470
pii: v6i4e12169
doi: 10.2196/12169
pmc: PMC6492057
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e12169Informations de copyright
©Debra Rickwood, Alison Wallace, Vanessa Kennedy, Shaunagh O’Sullivan, Nic Telford, Steven Leicester. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (http://mental.jmir.org), 17.04.2019.
Références
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003 Jul;60(7):709-17
pubmed: 12860775
Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc. 2005 Jan-Mar;14(1):22-31
pubmed: 15792291
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007 Jan;46(1):50-9
pubmed: 17195729
Lancet. 2007 Apr 14;369(9569):1302-1313
pubmed: 17434406
Aust J Rural Health. 2007 Apr;15(2):81-7
pubmed: 17441815
Med J Aust. 2007 Oct 1;187(7 Suppl):S35-9
pubmed: 17908023
Med J Aust. 2007 Oct 1;187(7 Suppl):S40-2
pubmed: 17908024
CMAJ. 2008 May 6;178(10):1320-2
pubmed: 18458265
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2009 Apr;44(4):293-9
pubmed: 18830552
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2009 Jul;43(7):615-23
pubmed: 19530018
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2010 Feb;17(1):65-72
pubmed: 20100307
Med J Aust. 2010 Jun 7;192(11 Suppl):S22-6
pubmed: 20528703
Med J Aust. 2010 Jun 7;192(11 Suppl):S4-11
pubmed: 20528707
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2012 Mar;39(1-2):71-7
pubmed: 22407558
Ment Health Fam Med. 2011 Jun;8(2):87-96
pubmed: 22654971
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2014 Nov;8(4):382-6
pubmed: 24224930
World Psychiatry. 2014 Feb;13(1):4-11
pubmed: 24497236
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2014 Nov 25;7:303-12
pubmed: 25473320
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2017 Aug;11(4):296-305
pubmed: 25996832
Multivariate Behav Res. 1966 Apr 1;1(2):245-76
pubmed: 26828106
JMIR Ment Health. 2016 Aug 25;3(3):e40
pubmed: 27562729
Public Health Res Pract. 2017 Apr 27;27(2):null
pubmed: 28474049
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 20;8:CD011729
pubmed: 30124233
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Oct 24;20(10):e11160
pubmed: 30355553