Abstract：
BACKGROUND: This systematic review summarises the existing evidence on the implementation of technology-based mental healthcare models in the primary care setting.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL) in August 2019 and studies were selected according to predefined eligibility criteria. The main outcomes were clinical effectiveness, adherence to primary treatment and cost of implementation.
METHODS: Studies with an experimental or quasi-experimental design that evaluated the implementation of technology-based mental healthcare models were included.
RESULTS: Five articles met the inclusion criteria. The models included technological devices such as tablets, cellphones and computers, with programs and mobile apps that supported decision-making in the care pathway. These decisions took place at different times, from the universal screening phase to the follow-up of patients with specific conditions. In general, the studies showed a decrease in the reported symptoms. However, there was great heterogeneity in both the health conditions and the outcomes, which hindered a quantitative synthesis. The assessment of risk of bias showed low quality of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to support the implementation of a technology-based mental healthcare model. High quality studies that focus on implementation and effectiveness outcomes are needed to evaluate the impact of technology-based mental healthcare models in the primary care setting.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL) in August 2019 and studies were selected according to predefined eligibility criteria. The main outcomes were clinical effectiveness, adherence to primary treatment and cost of implementation.
METHODS: Studies with an experimental or quasi-experimental design that evaluated the implementation of technology-based mental healthcare models were included.
RESULTS: Five articles met the inclusion criteria. The models included technological devices such as tablets, cellphones and computers, with programs and mobile apps that supported decision-making in the care pathway. These decisions took place at different times, from the universal screening phase to the follow-up of patients with specific conditions. In general, the studies showed a decrease in the reported symptoms. However, there was great heterogeneity in both the health conditions and the outcomes, which hindered a quantitative synthesis. The assessment of risk of bias showed low quality of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to support the implementation of a technology-based mental healthcare model. High quality studies that focus on implementation and effectiveness outcomes are needed to evaluate the impact of technology-based mental healthcare models in the primary care setting.
摘要：
暂无翻译
