Objective: The uptake of digital interventions in mental health care (MHC) has been slow, as many therapists and patients believe that in-person contact is essential for establishing a good working relationship and good outcomes in treatment. The public health policies regarding social distancing during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced an abrupt transformation of MHC provisions for outpatients: Since mid-March 2020, nearly all in-person contact was replaced with videoconferencing. The COVID-19 crisis offered a unique opportunity to investigate whether MHC with videoconferencing yields inferior results as compared to in-person interventions.
Method: In a large urban MHC facility in the Netherlands, measurement-based care is routine practice. Outcome data are regularly collected to support shared decision making and monitor patient progress. For this study, pretest and post-test data were used to compare outcomes for three cohorts: treatments performed prior to, partially during and entirely during the COVID-19 lockdown. Outcomes were compared in two large data sets: Basic MHC (N = 1392) and Specialized MHC (N = 1040).
Results: Therapeutic outcomes appeared robust for COVID-19 conditions across the three cohorts: No differences in outcomes were found between treatments that were conducted during lockdown compared to in-person treatments prior to COVID-19, or treatments which started in-person, but needed to be continued by means of videoconferencing.
Discussion: Videoconferencing care during the COVID-19 pandemic had similar outcomes compared to traditional in-person care. These real-world results corroborate findings of previous randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses in which videoconferencing and in-person care has been directly compared in terms of clinical effectiveness.
Keywords: COVID-19; anxiety; depression; effectiveness; videoconferencing treatment.
© 2022 The Authors. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.