Table 1displays their summarized characteristics, while Appendix 3 displays characteristics of the individual studies. Our included studies not only varied greatly from one another, they most often did not report sufficient information regarding inclusion criteria, population, setting, and exposure to assess potential clinical heterogeneity. We describe interventions and Mental health providers during COVID-19 outcomes based on the information provided in the studies.
Additional federal resources
Thus, there is much scope for improvement in order to use telemental health for prevention and early diagnosis of mental illnesses. Most articles in the scoping review described the management aspects of telemental health provision, with only a few describing preventative or rehabilitative aspects. Recommendations to enhance telemental health, classified by the NQF framework domains. Table 3 summarizes the recommendations, where they were made, for enhancing telemental health from the included articles by NQF domain (36/196; 18.37%). The map demonstrates that most articles examined management using telemental health and a few articles examined prevention or rehabilitation. The most frequent disorder subtypes, when specified, were depression (12/196; 6.12%), anxiety (10/196; 5.10%), and eating disorders (9/196; 4.59%).
- Perceptions of quality of care, relationships, and communication among currently practicing providers.
- Furthermore, numerous studies examined mental health solely during the initial pandemic wave or year 1,4,5,10.
- The COVID-19 pandemic has also intensified mental health issues, with reports of depression and anxiety surging due to prolonged lockdowns, job losses, and uncertainty about the future .
- Support from supervisors reduced the effect of work stressors on mental health symptoms.
- The higher levels of anxiety could be due to cultural differences between regions, such as the tighter social norms of cultures with a history of rice farming.
2. Survey
Although there was no change in ease of access to IT services, participants reported a decrease in difficulty with telehealth implementation from a median of 3 (not easy or difficult) at T1 to 2 (somewhat easy) at T2. Slightly more participants reported implementing telehealth services overall, though the percent of participants who endorsed scheduling virtual instead of in-person visits as a practice adjustment decreased by approximately 10% (169/235) from T1 to T2. Less than 5% of the data were missing for each variable of interest, with the exception of the number of patients seen via telehealth in December 2019 (21/235, 8.9%) and percent of time working remotely during the initial survey (18/235, 7.7%) and this follow-up survey (34/235, 14.5%).
The percentage of providers who reported burnout as an ongoing stressor is consistent with estimates from a 2021 survey of U.S. physicians (62.8%) (5). One quarter (25.6%) of providers reported mental distress severe enough to meet diagnostic criteria for psychopathology. Telehealth offers extraordinary possibilities, but without focused effort, telehealth practices will fall short of their potential. One of the great promises of telehealth is its potential to overcome barriers and reach new, previously underserved populations. Hybrid options that involve some in-person components and some telehealth components are likely to fill important clinical needs going forward, although, to date, there has been almost no research on such hybrid treatment models.
Second, providers shared observations of client challenges within the pandemic context who were reportedly engaged in CMH services, therefore emerging themes of pandemic-related challenges may differ for clients who are not engaged with services. It is essential for future investigations to examine a range of experiences and impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic among mental health providers across characteristics, contexts, and settings. Thus, social work provider perspectives in the sample may differ from providers of other disciplines, other mental health settings, and geographical areas across the world. Related to service delivery, it was apparent that provider shortage was common due COVID-19 symptoms or illness, quarantine, and using sick time to manage stress and mental health,all of which increased workloads and caseloads.