Perceived Knowledge and Attitude to Electronic Intervention for Depressive Symptom Alleviation Among Family Medicine Residents: A Cross-sectional Study

Background: Due to the high incidence of depression worldwide and increasing use of remote care, electronic interventions for the management of depression symptoms has increased. Digital mental health interventions, including electronic intervention for depression hold great potential to offer individualized tools for behavior assessment, peer support, therapy and consultation to researchers, mental health professionals, doctors and patients. The current study aimed to determine the knowledge and attitude of family medicine residents on electronic interventions for depressive symptoms. Methodology: This was a cross-sectional survey that included active resident physicians at any hospital that offers family and community medicine. Convenience sampling was done to recruit participants. A questionnaire which contained several questions to determine the knowledge of participants on applications to relieve depression as well as their attitudes towards these applications was administered via Google Forms. Results: A total of 51 participants were included. Most were aged 25-30 years old (62.7%) and were females (66.7%). Majority had no previous experience in using mobile applications for anxiety (78.4%) while most had access to mental health services (80.4%). The use of at least one e-mental health intervention was reported in 76.5% of participants. None of the factors assessed were shown to be associated with use of e-mental health intervention: age (p = 0.095), sex (p = 0.484), setting of residence (p = 0.092), living arrangement (p = 1.000), hour of internet use per day (p = 1.000), government or private institution (p = 0.743), traditional or practice-based training (p = 0.666), previous experience with the use of mobile applications for anxiety (p = 0.102) and access to mental health services (p = 0.417). More than half of the participants were not aware of the following e-mental health interventions: computerized Cognitive Behavior Therapy (ie, CBT delivered on app or website) (56.9%), digital Behavior Activation (ie, BA delivered on app or website) (68.6%), other digital self-management tools not based on CBT (60.8%), digital program for sleep management (52.9%) and digital mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (60.8%). More than half of the participants (58.8% to 78.4%) feel that the services are best offered as guided in all e-mental health interventions. Conclusion: We observed that more than half of family medicine residents were not aware of the majority of available e-mental health interventions; also, about three-fourths had experienced using any e-mental health intervention. Most preferred mixed guided and unguided electronic based interventions. About half of the residents see the appropriateness of e-mental health interventions for prevention of depression and for mild to moderate depression. Less than one-fourth of participants see the need for training in e-mental health interventions. Our findings suggest the need to increase family medicine residents’ awareness on e-mental health interventions aside from its use for screening or diagnosis. Given that a majority sees the interventions as potentially useful and most already have some form of experience in its use, there is readiness to scale up and promote its use in this group of clinicians.