Introduction
Methods
Development of attributes and levels
Attribute | Level | Description |
---|---|---|
1) Recommendation | From a colleague; from a professional association;
none | This feature refers to a recommendation that you received for the online component (tool or therapy program). |
2) Proven effectiveness | 9 out of 10 clients; 8 out of 10 clients; 7 out of 10 clients | This attribute describes the clinical effectiveness of the online component in comparison to no therapy based on the first studies, e.g., in the form “For 9 out of 10 clients, the online component (tool or program) was clinically effective”. Since 100% effectiveness has not yet been proven, the following options can be chosen: 7 out of 10, 8 out of 10, and 9 out of 10 clients. |
3) Time ratio of face-to-face and online sessions | 20:80;
50:50;
80:20 | This attribute relates to the time invested and describes the percentage (%) ratio in which personal sessions and an online component (tool or program) are combined in an individual therapy process for each client. Examples are 20:80, 50:50 or 80:20, where the first number reflects face-to-face sessions and the second reflects the client’s independent work with an online component. |
4) Reimbursement for the use of an online component | Proportional to time investment; proportional to time investment + lump sum | This attribute describes the reimbursement model for the use of BC: Proportional to the time invested for the online component per therapy block (preparation, follow-up work, supervision of homework, etc.) or rather proportional to the time invested for the application of an online component plus a lump sum. |
Choice tasks and experimental design
Survey design
Data collection
Statistical analysis
Results
Respondent characteristics
Respondent characteristics (n = 200) | Experiences and expectations regarding BC | ||
---|---|---|---|
Mean age in years | 48 | Experience with BC format in therapy | |
Female | 43% | Yes | 26.5% |
Therapeutic orientation | No | 73.5% | |
Behavioral | 52.5% | Evaluation of previous experience with BC | |
Psychodynamic or analytic | 39% | Excellent | 7.5% |
Behavioral and psychodynamic or analytic | 3% | Satisfied | 54.7% |
Systemic | 1% | Neither good nor bad | 32.1% |
Humanistic | 0.5% | Bad | 5.7% |
Another | 4% | Very bad | 0% |
Professional background | Willing to use BC in the future | ||
Psychological psychotherapist | 1.5% | Yes | 90.5% |
Medical psychotherapist | 89% | No | 8.5% |
Child and adolescent psychotherapist | 1% | Preferred timing of BC application | |
Alternative practitioner for psychotherapy | 0% | Stepped care before in-person treatment | 9% |
Psychiatrist | 3.5% | Integrated parallel BC | 68.5% |
Psychiatrist and psychotherapist | 3.5% | After in-person treatment | 22.5% |
General practitioner | 1% | Perceived main advantage of BC | |
Neurologist | 0.5% | Time savings for therapists and patients | 22.2% |
Main place of work | Patient empowerment | 21.3% | |
Own outpatient practice | 33% | Increase in treatment efficacy | 15% |
Clinic/hospital | 55% | Flexibility for therapists and patients | 7.5% |
Other | 12% | Larger patient group can be reached | 6.7% |
Satisfaction with monthly income | Bridging waiting times for therapy | 4.6% | |
Highly satisfied | 8% | Perceived main risk of BC | |
Satisfied | 60.5% | Lack of personal support for patient | 26.1% |
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied | 20% | Deterioration of therapeutic alliance | 17.4% |
Dissatisfied | 10% | Misinterpretation and treatment errors | 23.1% |
Very dissatisfied | 1.5% | Overburdening patient compliance | 9.3% |
Privacy risks | 7.7% | ||
Low level of customization | 6.7% | ||
Lack of therapeutic effectiveness | 5.6% |
Experiences with and expectations for BC
Discrete choice experiment results
Preference estimates | Marginal effect | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Attributes and levels | Coefficient | 95% CI | SD | 95% CI of SD | |
Recommendation | |||||
None | Reference | Reference | |||
Colleagues | 1.30 | [0.94,1.65] | 1.46 | [0.97,1.96] | 12.2% |
Professional societies | 2.70 | [2.12,3.27] | 2.45 | [1.78,3.11] | 25.7% |
Effectiveness (linear) | 1.08 | [0.85,1.30] | 1.02 | [0.73,1.30] | |
8 of 10 vs. 7 of 10 | 10.7% | ||||
9 of 10 vs. 7 of 10 | 21.0% | ||||
Face to face vs. online | 0.03 | [0.01,0.04] | 0.09 | [0.07,0.11] | |
50:50 vs. 20:80 | 7.4% | ||||
80:20 vs. 20:80 | 14.2% | ||||
Reimbursement | |||||
Proportional to time | Reference | Reference | |||
Time + lump sum | 0.95 | [0.66,1.23] | 1.33 | [1.02,1.63] | 9.5% |
ASC | −0.32 | [−1.33,0.69] | 1.37 | [0.59,2.15] | |
ASC x block2 | 0.05 | [−0.97,1.08] | 1.39 | [0.51,2.27] | |
ASC x block3 | 0.29 | [−0.70,1.29] | 1.63 | [0.58,2.67] | |
Log likelihood | −1568 | ||||
AIC | 3223 | ||||
BIC | 3521 | ||||
Respondents | 200 | ||||
Observations | 6400 |