(PS8-96) Impact of Treatment Modality on Child and Adolescent Mental Health Outcomes: A Comparison of Tele-Mental Health, In-Person, and Hybrid Approaches

Abstract Text: Tele-mental health (TBH), the delivery of mental health services via technology, has become increasingly important due to its ability to address barriers to traditional in-person care. Factors such as increased accessibility, reduced stigma, cost-effectiveness, and heightened demand following the COVID-19 pandemic have amplified its significance. While TBH shows promise for children and adolescents, there is limited data comparing its effectiveness to in-person and hybrid treatment models (combining in-person and telehealth). This gap hinders informed decision-making by clinicians, families, and policymakers regarding optimal treatment modalities for young people. Rigorous comparison of tele-behavioral health (TBH), in-person, and hybrid models is crucial for optimizing mental health service delivery and improving the well-being of this population.
This study examined the comparative effects of tele-mental health, in-person therapy, and hybrid models on mental health symptom improvement in children and adolescents. These real-world data are based on clinical records from a national network of clinics which provide outpatient mental health services. Treatment outcome was assessed for all clients using therapist rating of treatment goal attainment (Full, Partial, or No Goals Met) and for a subset of clients for whom pre-post PHQ-A scores were available. Clients included in this study were coded as receiving tele-mental health (N = 175), in-person therapy (N = 380), or hybrid treatment (N = 286). Results indicated that both in-person therapy (mean PHQ-A change = 3.97) and telehealth (mean PHQ-A change = 2.96), and hybrid (mean PHQ-A change = 3.59) demonstrated similar reductions in depression symptoms. However, the hybrid model demonstrated the highest rate of treatment goal attainment (48.8% of full treatment goals met), compared to telehealth (39.5% of full treatment goals met). In conclusion, while in-person and telehealth were equally effective in reducing depression symptoms, hybrid treatment excelled in achieving treatment goals. Further research is needed to investigate the factors contributing to these differences and to address the limitations of this study, such as the lack of clear parameters for, and heterogeneity within, hybrid treatment and discrepancies in sample sizes.