The use of videoconferencing with patients with psychosis: a review of the literature

Videoconferencing has become an increasingly viable tool in psychiatry, with a growing body of literature on its use with a range of patient populations. A number of factors make it particularly well suited for patients with psychosis. For example, patients living in remote or underserved areas can be seen by a specialist without need for travel. However, the hallmark symptoms of psychotic disorders might lead one to question the feasibility of videoconferencing with these patients. For example, does videoconferencing exacerbate delusions, such as paranoia or delusions of reference? Are acutely psychotic patients willing to be interviewed remotely by videoconferencing? To address these and other issues, we conducted an extensive review of Medline, PsychINFO, and the Telemedicine Information Exchange databases for literature on videoconferencing and psychosis. Findings generally indicated that assessment and treatment via videoconferencing is equivalent to in person and is tolerated and well accepted. There is little evidence that patients with psychosis have difficulty with videoconferencing or experience any exacerbation of symptoms; in fact, there is some evidence to suggest that the distance afforded can be a positive factor. The results of two large clinical trials support the reliability and effectiveness of centralized remote assessment of patients with schizophrenia

Primary care patients in psychiatric clinical trials: a pilot study using videoconferencing

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While primary care physicians play a pivotal role in the treatment of depression, collaboration between primary care and psychiatry in clinical research has been limited. Primary care settings provide unique opportunities to improve the methodology of psychiatric clinical trials, by providing more generalizable and less treatment-resistant patients. We examined the feasibility of identifying, recruiting, screening and assessing primary care patients for psychiatric clinical trials using high-quality videoconferencing in a mock clinical trial.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>1329 patients at two primary care clinics completed a self-report questionnaire. Those screening positive for major depression, panic, or generalized anxiety were given a diagnostic interview via videoconference. Those eligible were provided treatment as usual by their primary care physician, and had 6 weekly assessments by the off-site clinician via videoconferencing.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>45 patients were enrolled over 22 weeks, with 36 (80%) completing the six-week study with no more than two missed appointments. All diagnostic groups improved significantly; 94% reported they would participate again, 87% would recommend participation to others, 96% felt comfortable communicating via videoconference, and 94% were able to satisfactorily communicate their feelings via video.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Results showed that primary care patients will enroll, participate in and complete psychiatric research protocols using remote interviews conducted via videoconference.</p

Enriched rater training using Internet based technologies: a comparison to traditional rater training in a multi-site depression trial

Abstract Objective: The evaluation and training of raters who conduct efficacy evaluations in clinical trials is an important methodological variable that is often overlooked. Few rater training programs focus on teaching and assessing applied clinical skills, and even fewer have been empirically examined for efficacy. The goal of this study was to develop a comprehensive, standardized, interactive rater training program using new technologies, and to compare the relative effectiveness of this approach to &apos;&apos;traditional&apos;&apos; rater training in a multi-center clinical trial. Method: 12 sites from a 22 site multi-center study were randomly selected to participate (6 = traditional, 6 = enriched). Traditional training consisted of an overview of scoring conventions, watching and scoring videotapes with discussion, and observation of interviews in small groups with feedback. Enriched training consisted of an interactive web tutorial, and live, remote observation of trainees conducting interviews with real or standardized patients, via video-or teleconference. Outcome measures included a didactic exam on conceptual knowledge and blinded ratings of traineeÕs audiotaped interviews. Results: A significant difference was found between enriched and traditional training on pre-to-post training improvement on didactic knowledge, t(27) = 4.2, p &lt; 0.0001. Enriched trainees clinical skills also improved significantly more than traditional trainees, t(56) = 2.1, p = 0.035. All trainees found the applied training helpful, and wanted similar web tutorials with other scales. Conclusions: Results support the efficacy of enriched rater training in improving both conceptual knowledge and applied skills. Remote technologies enhance training efforts, and make training accessible and cost-effective. Future rater training efforts should be subject to empirical evaluation, and include training on applied skills