Therapy Mode Preference Scale: Preliminary Validation Methodological Design.

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Formative Research Pub Date : 2024-11-29 DOI:10.2196/65477
Brianna Cerrito, Jamie Xiao, Amanda Fialk, Frank D Buono
{"title":"Therapy Mode Preference Scale: Preliminary Validation Methodological Design.","authors":"Brianna Cerrito, Jamie Xiao, Amanda Fialk, Frank D Buono","doi":"10.2196/65477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of tele-mental health care increased rapidly in 2020 as a critical response to the COVID-19 pandemic, serving as an effective contact-free alternative to treatment. Today, tele-mental health care remains a viable option for individuals with geographic and physical barriers to treatment. However, there are several potential therapeutic disadvantages to tele-mental health care (ie, missing nonverbal signals, handling crises, confidentiality, weakened social connection in group therapy) that should be evaluated. While published literature has explored client satisfaction within teletherapy and the effect of using technology for tele-mental health care demands, there is a need for published surveys that evaluate the therapeutic experience in teletherapy and in-person mediums of care.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The authors of this study sought to develop and validate a survey that could evaluate the comparative impact of teletherapy and in-person care from a therapeutic perspective across key factors (ie, therapeutic alliance, engagement, rapport, and confidentiality).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were clients who experienced both tele-mental health care and in-person therapy at an intensive outpatient mental health treatment program for young adults from April 2020 through June 2022. Generated items on the survey were formulated based on input from experts in the field and existing validated scales. All individuals completed the survey on the internet, following informed consent (n=89). An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to understand factor structure, and Cronbach α was used to determine internal consistency. Incremental validity was demonstrated through a hierarchical linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The exploratory factor analysis revealed a 14-item, 3-factor structure. All 14 items correlated at a minimum of 0.30 with at least one other item. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.75 and Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant (χ291=528.41, P<.001). In total, 3 factors accounted for 61% of the variance, and the preliminary Cronbach α (α=0.71) indicates a satisfactory level of internal consistency. The Zoom Exhaustion and Fatigue Scale (ZEF) and Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ; -0.29) were significantly correlated, as well as the ZEF and Therapy Mode Preference Scale (TMPS; -0.31), and CSQ and TMPS (0.50; P<.001). Hierarchical linear regression revealed that the CSQ significantly accounted for additional variance in the TMPS (P<.001). With the ZEF entered into the model, no further variance was accounted for (P=.06).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Continual research is warranted to expand the current findings by validating this standardized tool for assessing the therapeutic impact of teletherapy versus in-person care in a generalizable population.</p>","PeriodicalId":14841,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Formative Research","volume":"8 ","pages":"e65477"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11623782/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Formative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/65477","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of tele-mental health care increased rapidly in 2020 as a critical response to the COVID-19 pandemic, serving as an effective contact-free alternative to treatment. Today, tele-mental health care remains a viable option for individuals with geographic and physical barriers to treatment. However, there are several potential therapeutic disadvantages to tele-mental health care (ie, missing nonverbal signals, handling crises, confidentiality, weakened social connection in group therapy) that should be evaluated. While published literature has explored client satisfaction within teletherapy and the effect of using technology for tele-mental health care demands, there is a need for published surveys that evaluate the therapeutic experience in teletherapy and in-person mediums of care.

Objective: The authors of this study sought to develop and validate a survey that could evaluate the comparative impact of teletherapy and in-person care from a therapeutic perspective across key factors (ie, therapeutic alliance, engagement, rapport, and confidentiality).

Methods: Participants were clients who experienced both tele-mental health care and in-person therapy at an intensive outpatient mental health treatment program for young adults from April 2020 through June 2022. Generated items on the survey were formulated based on input from experts in the field and existing validated scales. All individuals completed the survey on the internet, following informed consent (n=89). An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to understand factor structure, and Cronbach α was used to determine internal consistency. Incremental validity was demonstrated through a hierarchical linear regression.

Results: The exploratory factor analysis revealed a 14-item, 3-factor structure. All 14 items correlated at a minimum of 0.30 with at least one other item. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was 0.75 and Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant (χ291=528.41, P<.001). In total, 3 factors accounted for 61% of the variance, and the preliminary Cronbach α (α=0.71) indicates a satisfactory level of internal consistency. The Zoom Exhaustion and Fatigue Scale (ZEF) and Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ; -0.29) were significantly correlated, as well as the ZEF and Therapy Mode Preference Scale (TMPS; -0.31), and CSQ and TMPS (0.50; P<.001). Hierarchical linear regression revealed that the CSQ significantly accounted for additional variance in the TMPS (P<.001). With the ZEF entered into the model, no further variance was accounted for (P=.06).

Conclusions: Continual research is warranted to expand the current findings by validating this standardized tool for assessing the therapeutic impact of teletherapy versus in-person care in a generalizable population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗模式偏好量表:初步验证方法设计。
背景:作为应对COVID-19大流行的关键措施,远程精神卫生保健的使用在2020年迅速增加,是一种有效的非接触治疗替代方案。今天,远程心理保健仍然是地理上和身体上有治疗障碍的个人的一个可行选择。然而,远程心理保健有几个潜在的治疗缺点(即缺少非语言信号、处理危机、保密、团体治疗中的社会联系减弱),应该加以评估。虽然已发表的文献探讨了远程治疗中的客户满意度和使用技术满足远程心理保健需求的效果,但仍有必要发表调查报告,评估远程治疗和面对面护理媒介的治疗经验。目的:本研究的作者试图开发并验证一项调查,该调查可以从治疗的角度评估远程治疗和面对面护理的比较影响,包括关键因素(如治疗联盟、参与、融洽和保密)。方法:参与者是在2020年4月至2022年6月期间在年轻人密集门诊心理健康治疗项目中经历远程心理健康护理和现场治疗的客户。调查中生成的项目是根据该领域专家的意见和现有的有效量表制定的。根据知情同意(n=89),所有个人都在网上完成了调查。采用探索性因子分析了解因子结构,采用Cronbach α测定内部一致性。通过层次线性回归证明了增量效度。结果:探索性因子分析显示了一个14项、3因素的结构。所有14个项目与至少一个其他项目的相关性至少为0.30。Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin抽样充足性测量值为0.75,Bartlett球形检验值显著(χ291=528.41, p)结论:通过验证这一标准化工具,在可推广的人群中评估远程治疗与现场护理的治疗效果,有必要继续研究以扩大目前的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Formative Research
JMIR Formative Research Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
579
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluating an Incentive-Based mHealth App for Physical Activity Promotion Using the Obesity-Related Behavioral Intervention Trial Model: Small Cohort Study. Rangatahi Youth-Led Dissemination Campaign for Cocreated Eating and Well-Being Guidelines: Process and Pilot Implementation Evaluation. A Text Messaging-Based Program to Transition From Basal Insulin to Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Safety-Net Diabetes Care: Pilot Quality Improvement Intervention Study. Provider-Engaged Development of a Sexual Dysfunction Screening Approach for Adolescents and Young Adult Childhood Cancer Survivors: Iterative Co-Design Study. Evaluation of a Parent Multimedia and Mobile-Based Intervention to Promote Pediatric Oral Health (BeReadyToSmile): Single-Group Pre-Post Feasibility Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1