Perspectives of Online Mental Health
There are different perspectives when it comes to traditional psychiatric and psychological mental health services (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). Many individuals like face-to-face interactions because they receive more emotion and a better understanding of what is being said by the provider. Others indicate that they would prefer telemental health, as described as “the use of a communication device for a real-time service provision when the client and the provider are physically separated at the time the service is rendered” (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008, pg.158). There are numerous studies that try and evaluate which is a better route for the client, in a traditional setting or the digital world.
Now, the current study took a look at inmates and their perceptions of telemental health versus traditional face-to-face treatment, since inmates have a larger number of psychological problems than the rest of the general public (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). The perspective of the provider in this situation is that they would prefer the telemental side because they are safer and out of the way of harm, since they are providing for inmates and it is in a more dangerous setting . Also, telemental health services are cheaper because there is not any transportation needed for the inmates. This study consisted of 186 adult male inmates who were getting mental health services and who were enrolled in a correctional institution. There were 50 inmates who received face-to-face psychological treatment, 36 who received telemental health psychological services, 50 who took part in face-to-face psychiatric services, and 50 inmates who received telemental health psychiatric services. Majority of the inmates had mental ill problems dealing with mood disorders, such as bipolar, and schizophrenia (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). The inmates also differed from one another in race (Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic), crime (Drug and alcohol offenses, murder, assault/battery, or theft), and marital status (married, single, divorced). The researchers examined the inmate’s mood, satisfaction, and general attitudes and perceptions toward the use of mental health services that were received through telemental health. The researchers used what they called the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ). This had eight items and was a 4-point Likert scale to rate the inmate’s satisfaction with the services provided. Another questionnaire used was the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI). This questionnaire had 36 items with three subscales; “client and therapist agreement on the goals of therapy, client and therapist agreement on how to reach the goals of therapy, and the degree of confidence, trust, comfort, and acceptance between the client and provider” (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008, p. 161). A final questionnaire the researchers used was the Session Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ). This questionnaire is mainly for the client’s postsession mood, which consisted of two different dimensions, positivity and arousal. The inmates were scheduled for either the face-to-face or telemental health psychiatric or psychological service. The telementalhealth was through a videoconferencing through a secured satellite line. They were scheduled during the inmate’s regular institutional procedures and were recruited after they were done with their session. The only criteria that was required of the inmate was that they could read and write English (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008).
The researchers came to the conclusion that there was not a difference between the inmates receiving either telemental health or face-to-face services (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). There was also not a difference between the inmates evaluation of their psychology session. Also, the inmates had the same positive feelings towards telemental health as inmates receiving face-to-face sessions. With psychiatric services, there were also not any differences between inmates receiving telemental health or face-to-face services. There was also not a difference between the inmate’s evaluation of the session. Finally, the inmates were positively satisfied with their telemental health session compared to the inmates who had traditional face-to-face session (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008).
Now, the current study took a look at inmates and their perceptions of telemental health versus traditional face-to-face treatment, since inmates have a larger number of psychological problems than the rest of the general public (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). The perspective of the provider in this situation is that they would prefer the telemental side because they are safer and out of the way of harm, since they are providing for inmates and it is in a more dangerous setting . Also, telemental health services are cheaper because there is not any transportation needed for the inmates. This study consisted of 186 adult male inmates who were getting mental health services and who were enrolled in a correctional institution. There were 50 inmates who received face-to-face psychological treatment, 36 who received telemental health psychological services, 50 who took part in face-to-face psychiatric services, and 50 inmates who received telemental health psychiatric services. Majority of the inmates had mental ill problems dealing with mood disorders, such as bipolar, and schizophrenia (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). The inmates also differed from one another in race (Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic), crime (Drug and alcohol offenses, murder, assault/battery, or theft), and marital status (married, single, divorced). The researchers examined the inmate’s mood, satisfaction, and general attitudes and perceptions toward the use of mental health services that were received through telemental health. The researchers used what they called the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ). This had eight items and was a 4-point Likert scale to rate the inmate’s satisfaction with the services provided. Another questionnaire used was the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI). This questionnaire had 36 items with three subscales; “client and therapist agreement on the goals of therapy, client and therapist agreement on how to reach the goals of therapy, and the degree of confidence, trust, comfort, and acceptance between the client and provider” (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008, p. 161). A final questionnaire the researchers used was the Session Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ). This questionnaire is mainly for the client’s postsession mood, which consisted of two different dimensions, positivity and arousal. The inmates were scheduled for either the face-to-face or telemental health psychiatric or psychological service. The telementalhealth was through a videoconferencing through a secured satellite line. They were scheduled during the inmate’s regular institutional procedures and were recruited after they were done with their session. The only criteria that was required of the inmate was that they could read and write English (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008).
The researchers came to the conclusion that there was not a difference between the inmates receiving either telemental health or face-to-face services (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008). There was also not a difference between the inmates evaluation of their psychology session. Also, the inmates had the same positive feelings towards telemental health as inmates receiving face-to-face sessions. With psychiatric services, there were also not any differences between inmates receiving telemental health or face-to-face services. There was also not a difference between the inmate’s evaluation of the session. Finally, the inmates were positively satisfied with their telemental health session compared to the inmates who had traditional face-to-face session (Morgan, Patrick, & Magaletta, 2008).