TY  - JOUR
AU  - Peipert, Allison
AU  - Krendl, Anne C
AU  - Lorenzo-Luaces, Lorenzo
PY  - 2022
DA  - 2022/9/16
TI  - Waiting Lists for Psychotherapy and Provider Attitudes Toward Low-Intensity Treatments as Potential Interventions: Survey Study
JO  - JMIR Form Res
SP  - e39787
VL  - 6
IS  - 9
KW  - psychotherapy
KW  - CBT
KW  - cognitive behavioral therapy
KW  - behavior therapy
KW  - digital mental health
KW  - self-help
KW  - support group
KW  - mental health
KW  - digital health
KW  - eHealth
KW  - low-intensity intervention
KW  - survey
KW  - waiting list
KW  - health system
KW  - health care delivery
KW  - health care professional
KW  - care provider
KW  - bibliotherapy
KW  - attitude
KW  - perception
KW  - digital intervention
KW  - web-based intervention
KW  - depression
KW  - anxiety
KW  - mental disorder
AB  - Background: Common mental disorders, including depression and anxiety, are leading causes of disability worldwide. Digital mental health interventions, such as web-based self-help and other low-intensity treatments (LITs) that are not digital (eg, bibliotherapy), have the potential to reach many individuals by circumventing common barriers present in traditional mental health care. It is unclear how often LITs are used in clinical practice, or whether providers would be interested in their use for treatment waiting lists. Objective: The aims of this study were to (1) describe current practices for treatment waiting lists, (2) describe providers’ attitudes toward digital and nondigital LITs for patients on a waiting list, and (3) explore providers’ willingness to use digital and nondigital LITs and their decisions to learn about them. Methods: We surveyed 141 practicing mental health care providers (eg, therapists and psychologists) and provided an opportunity for them to learn about LITs. Results: Most participants reported keeping a waiting list. Few participants reported currently recommending digital or nondigital LITs, though most were willing to use at least one for patients on their waiting list. Attitudes toward digital and nondigital LITs were neutral to positive. Guided digital and nondigital LITs were generally perceived to be more effective but less accessible, and unguided interventions were perceived to be less effective but more accessible. Most participants selected to access additional information on LITs, with the most popular being web-based self-help. Conclusions: Results suggest providers are currently not recommending LITs for patients on treatment waiting lists but would be willing to recommend them. Future work should explore barriers and facilitators to implementing digital and nondigital LITs for patients on treatment waiting lists. 
SN  - 2561-326X
UR  - https://formative.jmir.org/2022/9/e39787
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2196/39787
UR  - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36112400
DO  - 10.2196/39787
ID  - info:doi/10.2196/39787
ER  -