Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Impacts of Web-Based Patient Education on Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder: Quasi-Experimental Cluster Study (Preprint)
Authors: Laine Anna , Välimäki Maritta , Pekurinen Virve , Löyttyniemi Eliisa , Marttunen Mauri , Anttila Minna 
Published: October 2019

BACKGROUND

Web-based interventions are promising tools for increasing the understanding of illness and treatment among patients with serious mental disorders.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of a Web-based patient education intervention using a quasi-experimental cluster design to report feedback on patient education sessions and the website used and to report preliminary evidence of the intervention’s impact on patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

METHODS

A single-blind, parallel, quasi-experimental cluster study over a 6-month period comparing Web-based education (n=33) with a nonequivalent control group (treatment as usual, n=24) for people with schizophrenia spectrum disorder was conducted. Participants (N=57) were recruited from one psychiatric hospital (6 wards). Feasibility was assessed by participants’ commitment (refusal rate, dropout rate) to the study. Acceptability was assessed as participants’ commitment to the intervention. Patient education sessions and website feedback were assessed by the patients and health care professionals. The preliminary impact of the sessions on patients’ self-efficacy, self-esteem, illness cognition, and knowledge level was measured at baseline and follow-ups (8 weeks, 6 months) with self-rated questionnaires.

RESULTS

The refusal rate among patients was high with no statistically significant difference (69% [74/107] in the intervention group, 76% [76/100] in the control group; <italic>P</italic>=.21). The same result was found for the dropout rates (48% [16/33] vs 58% [14/24]; <italic>P</italic>=.46). The acceptability of the intervention was good; 31 participants out of 33 (94%) completed all five sessions. Feedback on the intervention was mainly positive; three out of four subscales of session were rated above the midpoint of 4.0. Feedback on the website was also positive, with a grade of good for content (69%, 20/29 patients; 75%, 21/28 professionals), layout (62%, 18/29 patients; 61%, 17/28 professionals), and usability (62%, 18/29 patients; and 68%, 19/28 professionals). The patients using the intervention had significantly higher scores 6 months after the sessions in self-efficacy (baseline mean 26.12, SD 5.64 vs 6-month mean 29.24, SD 6.05; <italic>P</italic>=.003) and regarding knowledge level about schizophrenia (mean 11.39, SD 4.65 vs 6-month mean 15.06, SD 5.26; <italic>P</italic>=.002), and lower scores in the subscale of helplessness in illness cognition (mean 2.26, SD 0.96 vs 6-month mean 1.85, SD 0.59; <italic>P</italic>=.03). Differences from the control group were not significant. No differences were found in patients’ self-esteem or other subscales in illness cognition.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients were reluctant to participate in the study and tended to drop out before the follow-ups. Once they had participated, their acceptance of the intervention was high. A more effective recruitment strategy and monitoring method will be needed in future studies. To assess the impact of the intervention, a more rigorous study design with an adequately powered sample size will be used in cooperation with outpatient mental health services.