Cargando…
„In Videobehandlungen trotz Distanz Nähe schaffen“: Wie erlebten Psychotherapeuten die Durchführung von Videobehandlungen in Zeiten von COVID-19?
BACKGROUND: As a result of the contact ban issued at the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in March 2020, psychotherapists provided significantly more video-based therapy (VBT) and most of them provided it the first time. To date, there is little research on how therapist...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Medizin
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8386344/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34456515 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00278-021-00529-y |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: As a result of the contact ban issued at the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in March 2020, psychotherapists provided significantly more video-based therapy (VBT) and most of them provided it the first time. To date, there is little research on how therapists experienced VBT during the pandemic and no studies are available that look at possible procedure-specific features. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to analyze what subjective experiences therapists of different guideline procedures had with the implementation of VBT in times of the COVID 19 pandemic and what advantages and disadvantages they experienced. METHODS: This was a mixed methods study with a cross-sectional online survey. In addition to quantitative data, seven open-ended questions were used to collect therapists’ subjective experiences with conducting VBT and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The identified categories were subjected to a frequency analysis. Data from 174 medical or psychological psychotherapists were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Particularly frequently mentioned advantages were flexibility of location and time, continuity of contact during pandemic periods and avoidance of risk of infection. The most commonly cited disadvantage was the lack of sensory input, facial expressions, gestures, eye contact, and nonverbal communication. The VBT was well-accepted by most, but not all, patients. Technical problems made the implementation difficult. CONCLUSION: For many therapists VBT remained a stopgap solution that was not designed to last; however, VBT could help to solve known care problems (e.g., underprovision in rural areas) beyond the pandemic period. The results of the study make an important contribution to weighing up the opportunities and risks of VBT for psychotherapeutic care and for keeping an eye on possible dangers and difficulties. |
---|