Top

BMC Psychiatry

Published in:

01-12-2021 | Mood Disorders | Research article

Acceptability of a digital return-to-work intervention for common mental disorders: a qualitative study on service user perspectives

Authors: Patrik Engdahl, Petra Svedberg, Ulrika Bejerholm

Published in: BMC Psychiatry | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

There is an evident discrepancy between need and provision of evidence-based return-to-work (RTW) interventions in existing mental health services. Online dissemination of evidence-based interventions is presumed to reduce this gap. However, there is almost no knowledge available on perceived acceptability of digital RTW interventions among service users, which are factors that might influence the development and implementation of future interventions. The aim of this study was to develop knowledge of service user acceptability of mWorks, a proposed digital RTW solution.

Methods

Participants (n = 18) with experience of common mental disorder and sick leave were recruited with a purposive snowball sampling method. Semi-structured interviews (n = 12) and one focus group interview (n = 6) were conducted. A deductive thematic analysis was performed according to the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.

Results

Digital RTW interventions were perceived as acceptable and aligned with participant value. Participants expressed positive attitudes toward having access to support, regardless of time and place. A certain ambiguity between a decline in social interactions and opportunities to RTW in a safe space was reported. Participants were confident in their ability to use digital RTW solutions, but reported the need to reduce stressful elements of using smartphones. Overly demanding digital solutions, i.e. ones requiring high cognitive effort, were described as burdensome.

Conclusions

For digital RTW solutions to be acceptable, they need to complement traditional services by providing accessible and person-centred support throughout the RTW process. They should be designed to reduce the need for cognitive effort. Future research should explore how to balance user autonomy with other support components in digital interventions.

Available only for authorised users

World Health Organization. Depression and other common mental disorders: global health estimates. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. p. 1–17. https://www.who.int/mental_health/management/depression/prevalence_global_health_estimates/en/

OECD/European Union. Health at a Glance: Europe 2018: State of Health in the EU Cycle. Brussels: OECD Publishing, Paris/European Union; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1787/health_glance_eur-2018-en.CrossRef

Dewa CS, Loong D, Bonato S. Work outcomes of sickness absence related to mental disorders: a systematic literature review. BMJ Open. 2014;4(7):e005533. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005533.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dewa CS, Chau N, Dermer S. Examining the comparative incidence and costs of physical and mental health-related disabilities in an employed population. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52(7):758–62. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181e8cfb5.CrossRefPubMed

Joyce S, Modini M, Christensen H, Mykletun A, Bryant R, Mitchell PB, et al. Workplace interventions for common mental disorders: a systematic meta-review. Psychol Med. 2016;46(4):683–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002408.CrossRefPubMed

Johanson S, Bejerholm U. The role of empowerment and quality of life in depression severity among unemployed people with affective disorders receiving mental healthcare. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39(18):1807–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1211758.CrossRefPubMed

Bejerholm U, Larsson L, Hofgren C. Individual placement and support illustrated in the Swedish welfare system: a case study. J Vocation Rehabil. 2011;35(1):59–72. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2011-0554.CrossRef

Bonfils IS, Hansen H, Dalum HS, Eplov LF. Implementation of the individual placement and support approach – facilitators and barriers. Scand J Disabil Res. 2017;19(4):318–33.CrossRef

Patrick W. Corrigan, Stanley G McCracken. Place first, then train: an alternative to the medical model of psychiatric rehabilitation. Soc Work. 2005;50(1):31–9.CrossRef

10.

Hasson H, Andersson M, Bejerholm U. Management: barriers in implementation of evidence-based practice: supported employment in Swedish context. J Health Organ Manag. 2011;25(3):332–45. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777261111143563.CrossRefPubMed

11.

OECD. Mental health and work: Sweden, Mental Health and Work. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264188730-en.CrossRef

12.

Bejerholm U, Areberg C, Hofgren C, Sandlund M, Rinaldi M. Individual placement and support in Sweden—a randomized controlled trial. Nord J Psychiatry. 2015;69(1):57–66. https://doi.org/10.3109/08039488.2014.929739.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Lexén A, Emmelin M, Hansson L, Bejerholm U. Exploring the service and knowledge gap between rehabilitation professionals and employers in the return-to-work process of people with mental health problems in Sweden. Work. 2019;64(3):495–506. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-193011.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Modini M, Tan L, Brinchmann B, Wang M-J, Killackey E, Glozier N, et al. Supported employment for people with severe mental illness: systematic review and meta-analysis of the international evidence. Br J Psychiatry. 2016;209(1):14–22. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.115.165092.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Bejerholm U, Larsson ME, Johanson S. Supported employment adapted for people with affective disorders—a randomized controlled trial. J Affect Disord. 2017;1(207):212–20.CrossRef

16.

Reme SE, Grasdal AL, Løvvik C, Lie SA, Øverland S. Work-focused cognitive–behavioural therapy and individual job support to increase work participation in common mental disorders: a randomised controlled multicentre trial. Occupational and environmental medicine. Occup Environ Med. 2015;72(10):745–52. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2014-102700.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Porter S, Lexén A, Johanson S, Bejerholm U. Critical factors for the return-to-work process among people with affective disorders: voices from two vocational approaches. Work. 2018;60(2):221–34. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-182737.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Johanson S, Markström U, Larsson ME, Bejerholm U. Implementation of a novel return-to-work approach for persons with affective disorders in a traditional vocational rehabilitation context: a case study. Int J Ment Heal Syst. 2020;14(1):22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-020-00355-w.CrossRef

19.

Porter S, Lexén A, Bejerholm U. Mental health literacy among vocational rehabilitation professionals and their perception of employers in the return-to-work process. Vocation Rehabil J. 2019;50(2):157–69. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-180997.CrossRef

20.

Porter S, Lexén A, Bejerholm U. Employers’ beliefs, knowledge and strategies used in providing support to employees with mental health problems. J Vocation Rehabil. 2019;51(3):325–37. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-191049.CrossRef

21.

Lord SE, McGurk SR, Nicholson J, et al. The potential of technology for enhancing individual placement and support supported employment. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2014;37(2):99–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000070.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Bejerholm U, Sundquist J, Lars H, Gerdtham U, Stjernswärd S, Petersson G, Svedberg P. Work support in your pocket: Development and evaluation of mWorks, a digital mental health intervention to support RTW, participation and empowerment for persons with mental health problems. 2017. https://portal.research.lu.se/portal/en/projects/work-support-in-your-pocket-development-and-evaluation-of-mworks-a-digital-mental-health-intervention-for-returntowork-participation-and-empowerment-among-persons-with-mental-health-problems(4ff0939e-10e9-49b2-9d0c-63d4bdc7cfcc).html.

23.

Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Sekhon M, Cartwright M, Francis JJ. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: an overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Murphy AL, Gardner DM. Pharmacists’ acceptability of a men's mental health promotion program using the theoretical framework of acceptability. AIMS Public Health. 2019;6(2):195–208. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2019.2.195.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Cuijpers P, Noma H, Karyotaki E, Cipriani A, Furukawa TA. Effectiveness and acceptability of cognitive behavior therapy delivery formats in adults with depression: a network meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76(7):700–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.0268.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Apolinário-Hagen J, Kemper J, Stürmer C. Public acceptability of e-mental health treatment services for psychological problems: a scoping review. JMIR Mental Health. 2017;4(2):e10. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.6186.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Richards D, Richardson T. Computer-based psychological treatments for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32(4):329–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.02.004.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Stefanopoulou E, Lewis D, Taylor M, Broscombe J, Ahmad J, Larkin J. Are digitally delivered psychological interventions for depression the way forward?. A review. Psychiatric Q. 2018;89(4):779–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-018-9576-5.CrossRef

30.

Musiat P, Goldstone P, Tarrier N. Understanding the acceptability of e-mental health-attitudes and expectations towards computerised self-help treatments for mental health problems. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14(1):109. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-14-109.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Deen TL, Fortney JC, Schroeder G. Patient acceptance of and initiation and engagement in telepsychotherapy in primary care. Psychiatr Serv. 2013;64(4):380–4. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201200198.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Knowles SE, Toms G, Sanders C, Bee P, Lovell K, Rennick-Egglestone S, et al. Qualitative meta-synthesis of user experience of computerised therapy for depression and anxiety. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e84323. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084323.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Deady M, Johnston D, Milne D, Glozier N, Peters D, Calvo R, et al. Preliminary effectiveness of a smartphone app to reduce depressive symptoms in the workplace: feasibility and acceptability study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018;6(12):e11661. https://doi.org/10.2196/11661.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Walsh S, Kaselionyte J, Taylor SJ, Priebe S. What might affect acceptability of online positive psychology interventions for depression: a qualitative study on patient expectations. BMC Psychiatry. 2018;18(1):240. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1812-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Bylsma LM, Morris BH, Rottenberg J. A meta-analysis of emotional reactivity in major depressive disorder. Clin Psychol Rev. 2008;28(4):676–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.10.001.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Yardley L, Morrison L, Bradbury K, Muller I. The person-based approach to intervention development: application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(1):e30. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4055.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.CrossRef

38.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Marshall MN. Sampling for qualitative research. Fam Pract. 1996;13(6):522–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2015;42(5):533–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.CrossRef

41.

Guest G, Namey E, Taylor J, Eley N, McKenna K. Comparing focus groups and individual interviews: findings from a randomized study. 2017;20(6):693–708.

42.

Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Interviews: learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing: sage; 2009.

43.

Wärnestål P, Nygren J. Building an experience framework for a digital peer support service for children surviving from cancer. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children: 2013:ACM; 2013. p. 269–72.CrossRef

44.

Engdahl P, Svedberg P, Lexén A, Bejerholm U. Role of a Digital Return-To-Work Solution for Individuals With Common Mental Disorders: Qualitative. Study of the Perspectives of Three Stakeholder Groups. JMIR Form Res. 2020;4(9):e15625.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Baumeister H, Reichler L, Munzinger M, Lin J. The impact of guidance on Internet-based mental health interventions—A systematic review. Internet Interv. 2014;1(4):205–15.CrossRef

46.

Ricciardi W. Assessing the impact of digital transformation of health services: Opinion by the Expert Panel on Effective Ways of Investing in Health (EXPH). Eur J Pub Health. 2019;29(Supplement_4):ckz185–769.CrossRef

47.

Fitzpatrick KK, Darcy A, Vierhile M. Delivering cognitive behavior therapy to young adults with symptoms of depression and anxiety using a fully automated conversational agent (Woebot): a randomized controlled trial. JMIR Ment Health. 2017;4(2):e19. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.7785.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Strid C, Andersson C, Forsell Y, Öjehagen A, Lundh LG. Internet-based cognitive behaviour therapy and physical exercise–effects studied by automated telephone assessments in mental ill-health patients; a randomized controlled trial. Br J Clin Psychol. 2016;55(4):414–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjc.12111.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Stjernswärd S, Hansson L. Care S: Outcome of a web-based mindfulness intervention for families living with mental illness–A feasibility study. Inform Health Soc Care. 2017;42(1):97–108.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Ware LJ, Williams S, Bradbury K, Brant C, Little P, Hobbs F, et al. Exploring weight loss services in primary care and staff views on using a web-based programme. Inform Prim Care. 2012;20(4):283–8. https://doi.org/10.14236/jhi.v20i4.18.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Schwartz B. Self-determination: the tyranny of freedom. Am Psychol. 2000;55(1):79–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.79.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Flood D, Harrison R, Iacob C, Duce D. Evaluating mobile applications: a spreadsheet case study. Int J Mobile Hum Comp Interaction (IJMHCI). 2012;4(4):37–65. https://doi.org/10.4018/jmhci.2012100103.CrossRef

53.

Eldh A-C, Almost J, DeCorby-Watson K, Gifford W, Harvey G, Hasson H, et al. Clinical interventions, implementation interventions, and the potential greyness in between -a discussion paper. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1958-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Elwyn G, Nelson E, Hager A, Price A. Coproduction: when users define quality. BMJ Qual Saf. 2020;29(9):711–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009830.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Batalden M, Batalden P, Margolis P, Seid M, Armstrong G, Opipari-Arrigan L, et al. Coproduction of healthcare service. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25(7):509–17. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004315.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Denise F. Polit, Cheryl Tatano Beck. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–8.CrossRef

Title: Acceptability of a digital return-to-work intervention for common mental disorders: a qualitative study on service user perspectives
Authors: Patrik Engdahl
Petra Svedberg
Ulrika Bejerholm
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Mood Disorders
Affective Disorder
Published in: BMC Psychiatry / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-244X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-021-03386-w

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Acceptability of a digital return-to-work intervention for common mental disorders: a qualitative study on service user perspectives

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Measuring diagnostic heterogeneity using text-mining of the lived experiences of patients

Association study between genetic variants and the risk of schizophrenia in the Chinese population based on GWAS-implicated 6p21.3–23.1 human genome region: a case-control study

Prevalence and correlates of anxiety and depression in frontline healthcare workers treating people with COVID-19 in Bangladesh

Prevalence and associated factors of DSM-5 insomnia disorder in the general population of Qatar

Physical activity, sedentary behaviour and smoking status among psychiatric patients in Singapore – a cross-sectional study

Suicidality, function and associated negative life events in an adolescent psychiatric population at 3-year follow-up