Adherence to online psychotherapy during the COVID-19: a scoping review

Cardoso, Nicolas de Oliveira; Tagliapietra, Ketlin da Rosa; Salvador, Eduarda Zorgi; Machado, Wagner de Lara

doi:10.1590/1413-82712023280110

Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1555-1409

Ketlin da Rosa Tagliapietra

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5926-257X

Eduarda Zorgi Salvador

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3772-0453

Wagner de Lara Machado

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5555-5116

Contact: Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso Ipiranga Avenue, 6681 Partenon, Building 11 Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil Zip Code: 90619-900

Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso - PhD in Psychology, and currently a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil. E-mail: nicolas.deoliveira@hotmail.com

Ketlin da Rosa Tagliapietra - Psychologist, and currently a contributor of the well-being and mental health assessment research group at PUCRS, Department of Psychology, Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil. E-mail: ketlin.tagliapietra@hotmail.com

Eduarda Zorgi Salvador - Psychologist and graduate student in Clinical Psychology at PUCRS, Department of Psychology, Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil. E-mail: eduarda.salvador@edu.pucrs.br

Wagner de Lara Machado - PhD in Psychology, CNPq Research Productivity Fellow - PQ2, Adjunct Professor in Undergraduate and Graduate courses in Psychology and Professor in the Graduate Program in Business Administration at PUCRS. E-mail: wagner.machado@pucrs. br

Reference	Country	Method	Theoretical Approach*	Treatment Duration (Sessions n°)	Weekly Sessions (Duration)
1. Adamlje e Jendricko (2020)	Croatia	Experience report	Group psychoanalysis	4 months (17)	1 (90 min)
2. Békés e Doorn (2020)	USA, Canada Europe	Cross-Sectional Quantitative	Integrative	NR	NR
			Psychanalyses
			CBT
			Humanism
			Systemic
3. Békés et al. (2020)	USA,	Cross-sectional Quantitative	Psychanalyses	NR	NR
4. Brkic (2020)	Croatia	Experience report	Group psychoanalysis	NR	1 (90 min)
5. Doorn, Békés, Prout e Hoffman (2020)	USA,	Cross-sectional Quantitative	Integrative	NR	NR
			Psychanalyses
			CBT
			Humanism
			Systemic
6. Doorn, Békés e Prout (2020)	USA, Canada Europe	Cross-sectional Quantitative	Integrative	NR	NR
			Therapy
			Psychanalyses
			CBT
			Humanism
7. Feijt et al. (2020)	Netherlands	Cross-sectional Qualitative	NR	NR	NR
8. Lakeman e Crighton (2020)	Australia	Cross-sectional Qualitative	DBT	NR	NR
9. Dijk et. al. (2020)	Netherlands	Cross-sectional Qualitative	Group Scheme Therapy	5 months (40)	2 (60 min)
10. Wang et al. (2020)	USA, China	Cross-sectional Quantitative	Psychanalyses	NR	NR
11. Wood et al. (2020)	USA,	Cross-sectional Qualitative	Group ACT	1 month (4)	1 (NR)
12. Frayn et al. (2021Frayn, M., Fojtu, C., & Juarascio, A. (2021). COVID-19 and binge eating: Patient perceptions of eating disorder symptoms, tele-therapy, and treatment implications. Current Psychology, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01494-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01494... )	USA,	Cross-sectional Qualitative	NR	1 month (16)	2 (NR)
13. Cronin et al. (2021)	UK	Experience report	Systemic	NR	NR
14. Joshi et al. (2021)	India	Experience report	Group Systemic	1 month (5)	1 (90 min)
15. Kenny et al. (2021)	UK	Cross-sectional Mixed	Systemic	NR	NR
16. Lecomte et al. (2021)	Canada	Longitudinal Quantitative	Group CBT	3 months (24)	2 (60 min)
17. Lewis et al. (2021)	Israel	Cross-sectional Quantitative	CBT	NR	NR
18. Sampaio et al. (2021Sampaio, M., Haro, N. V. M., Sousa, B., Melo, V. W., & Hoffman, G. H. (2021). Therapists Make the Switch to Telepsychology to Safely Continue Treating Their Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Virtual Reality Telepsychology May Be Next. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 1(576421), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2020.576421 https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2020.57642... )	USA,	Cross-sectional Quantitative	NR	NR	NR

N°	Sample	Mean age (SD)	Sex	Symptoms or pathologies	Experience with online therapy¹	Factors that facilitate adherence to online therapy*	Factors that hinder adherence to online therapy*
1	8	23-52	63% (M)	Anxiety, Depression, PD	No	NR	NR
4	7	NR	86% (F)	NR	No	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Basic informatic knowledge	1) Resistance to online psychotherapy; 2) Difficulty in finding an adequate setting
9	4	64-70	75% (F)	Anxiety, Depression, PD	No	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Basic informatic knowledge	1) Feel more tired; 2) Resistance to online psychotherapy
11	7	26,9 (4,8)	57% (F)	Schizophrenia e OPD	No	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Basic informatic knowledge	1) Connection/Technical Issues
12	11	42,8 (14,2)	63,6% (F)	ED	No	1) Schedules flexibility; 2) No need to travel; 3) Fear of being contaminated with COVID-19; 4) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 5) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty in finding an adequate setting; 3) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection
13	NR	NR	NR	NR	NR	1) Schedules flexibility; 2) No need to travel; 3) Basic informatic knowledge; 4) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics	1) Risk of the patient getting distracted; 2) Difficulty in finding an adequate setting
14	20	18-40	95% (F)	NR	NR	1) Basic informatic knowledge; 2) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty in finding an adequate setting
16	14	22,5 (5,5)	70,5% (F)	Schizophrenia e BD	NR	1) Schedules flexibility; 2) No need to travel; 3) Reduction of expenses	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty in finding an adequate setting
17	63	27 (11,47)	91% (F)	ED	NR	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Fear of being contaminated with COVID-19	1) Perceiving the therapeutic relationship as less authentic or genuine

N°	Sample	Mean age (SD)	Sex	Experience with online therapy¹	Factors that facilitate adherence to online therapy*	Factors that hinder adherence to online therapy*
1	2	NR	NR	NR	1) Schedules flexibility; 2) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics	1) Difficulty maintaining professional boundaries; 2) Connection/Technical Issues; 3) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 4) Risk of the patient getting distracted; 5) Resistance to online psychotherapy
2	145	46,5 (14,83)	75,2% (F)	No (51%)	1) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 2) Patients provide positive feedback; 3) Peer influence; 4) Feeling confident or competent	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Feel more tired; 3) Difficulty for the patient to find an adequate setting; 4) Risk of the patient getting distracted; 5) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 7) Risk of the therapist getting distracted; 8) Perceiving the therapeutic relationship as less authentic or genuine; 9) Difficulty for the therapist to find an adequate setting; 10) Difficulty maintaining professional boundaries
3	190	60,5 (15)	66,8% (F)	Sim (55%)	1) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 2) Peer influence; 3) Feeling confident or competent	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty for the patient to find an adequate setting; 3) Risk of the patient getting distracted; 4) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 5) Risk of the therapist getting distracted; 6) Difficulty maintaining professional boundaries
4	1	NR	NR	No	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Feeling confident or competent	NR
5	339	55 (16,3)	73,5% (F)	NR	1) Feeling confident or competent	1) Feel more tired; 2) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 3) Perceiving the therapeutic relationship as less authentic or genuine
6	141	46 (14,8)	74,5% (F)	No (50,4%)	1) Peer influence; 2) Patients provide positive feedback; 3) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 4) Feeling confident or competent	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty for the patient to find an adequate setting; 3) Risk of the patient getting distracted; 4) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 5) Risk of the therapist getting distracted; 6) Perceiving the therapeutic relationship as less authentic or genuine
7	51	38(NR)	82% (F)	NR	1) Schedules flexibility; 2) No need to travel; 3) Additional information about the home environment	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 3) Resistance to online psychotherapy
8	28	47 (10)	NR	No	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Feeling confident or competent	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty for the patient to find an adequate setting; 3) Perceiving the therapeutic relationship as less authentic or genuine; 4) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 5) difficulty in increasing the engagement and motivation of some patients
9	NR	NR	NR	No	NR	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Resistance to online psychotherapy
10	164 (China)	20-59	73,1% (F)	NR	1) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy (Chinese); 2) Patients provide positive feedback; 3) Training/Structuring of Sessions	1) Opinions and negative experiences with online therapy (Americans); 2) Resistance to online psychotherapy (Americans); 3) Connection/Technical Issues;
10	165 (USA)	20-59	71,5% (F)	NR
11	NR	NR	NR	NR	1) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics	1) Connection/Technical Issues
13	19 >	NR	NR	NR	1) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 2) Patients provide positive feedback; 3) Training/Structuring of Sessions; 4) Additional information about the home environment; 5) Feeling confident or competent	1) Resistance to online psychotherapy; 2) Connection/Technical Issues; 3) Difficulties in communication and emotional connection; 4) Difficulty maintaining professional boundaries; 5) Difficulty for the therapist to find an adequate setting
14	5	25-41	100% (F)	No	1) Training/Structuring of Sessions; 2) Patients provide positive feedback	1) Connection/Technical Issues
15	312	NR	NR	No	1) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings; 2) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 3) Patients provide positive feedback 4) Reduction of expenses; 5) Basic informatic knowledge; 6) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics; 7) Additional information about the home environment; 8) Schedules flexibility; 9) No need to travel	1) Connection/Technical Issues; 2) Difficulty for the patient to find an adequate setting; 3) Feel more tired; 4) Difficulty maintaining professional boundaries; 5) Perceiving the therapeutic relationship as less authentic or genuine; 6) Difficulties in communication and emotional; 7) difficulty in increasing the engagement and motivation of some patients; 8) Risk of the patient getting distracted; 9) Risk of the therapist getting distracted
16	NR	NR	NR	NR	1) Less resistance to addressing sensitive topics; 2) Impossibility of face-to-face meetings	1) Connection/Technical Issues
18	768	43,7 (10,9)	92,2% (F)	No (61%)	1) Positive opinions or experiences with online psychotherapy; 2) Training/Structuring of Sessions; 3) Feeling confident or competent	1) Feel more tired; 2) Connection/Technical Issues; 3) Difficulty for the patient to find an adequate setting

[1] Contact: Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso Ipiranga Avenue, 6681 Partenon, Building 11 Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil Zip Code: 90619-900

Brasil

Brasil

Adherence to online psychotherapy during the COVID-19: a scoping review

Adesão à psicoterapia on-line durante a COVID-19: uma revisão de escopo

Adherencia a la psicoterapia online durante el COVID-19: una revisión del alcance

Abstract