The pandemic has upended every aspect of our lives, taking a huge toll on our collective mental and behavioral health. In the early stages of the pandemic, when most of us were confined to our homes, demand for telehealth surged.Telehealth utilization for office visits and outpatient care has reached 78 times its previous level. With providers and patients initially slow to show interest in virtual care, once-uncharted territory quickly became the only option available.
Today, as we continue to move toward a post-pandemic world, telehealth is no longer the only viable option for delivering and receiving care. One type of treatment certainly cannot meet everyone’s needs. Some patients will thrive in a virtual environment, while others are better suited to in-person care—it’s ultimately up to the patient and their provider to help determine the most effective path forward.
The most critical factor here is having a choice. The hybrid model allows patients and providers to choose whether they attend in-person or virtual meetings (or a combination of the two). It’s not just the future of care delivery; it’s the present.
Hybrid meets today’s needs
There are many benefits to offering virtual visits to mental and behavioral healthcare providers. It provides more treatment options for people living in rural areas, people with travel difficulties, full-time caregivers who don’t have time to leave, and parents with only an hour to spare – just to name a few. It also means that patients don’t have to connect with therapists and clinicians within a 10-mile radius of their home, but with their entire state, which helps find someone who truly fits their needs and style.
This extended access is also essential for providers.Demand for therapy today far exceeds the number of providers capable of providing care; American Psychological Association report Many psychologists are working at full capacity or overload, with 41% reporting that they are unable to meet their treatment needs, an 11% increase from the previous year.
When the pandemic started, in-person treatment was considered the gold standard. Today, however, the advantages of virtual therapy often outweigh the benefits of in-person therapy based solely on availability. Before the pandemic, mental health treatment options were very limited in many parts of the country, resulting in delayed or sporadic care for patients with untreated conditions. For these individuals, the availability of virtual therapy greatly alleviates the inherent limitations of in-person therapy.
What is clear is that in-person therapy and virtual therapy are not opposing forces against each other, but two halves of the same coin, as both serve an important purpose – to help those in need.
Hybrid serves every stakeholder
Various stakeholders in the healthcare ecosystem, including providers, patients, and payers, will benefit from the hybrid model. Here are just a few scenarios showing that hybrids are the future:
For providers, both in-person and virtual have advantages and disadvantages.
Some providers thrive in an in-person setting. Providers can uncover some important nuances in face-to-face interactions that are extremely valuable to the patient journey. Away from the screen, the face-to-face connection can also feel refreshing and less strenuous. Conversations often flow freely, creating a greater sense of comfort, which is often critical to making progress. The therapist can tap into the patient’s energy and assess physical aspects that might be missed in the virtual environment, such as small changes in body language or facial expressions.
That said, virtual therapy offers similar opportunities to those described above, but can provide the therapist with a window into the patient’s environment, which also provides valuable information for therapy. Seeing their interactions with pets and their level of relaxation and comfort can provide insight and direction on the patient’s overall condition.
Like other vendors considering returning to the office after two years, vendors may be weighing the opportunities — the cost of virtual versus in-person work. In an office or in-person clinical setting, providers will naturally have more frequent and unplanned opportunities to interact with colleagues and peers, resulting in a greater sense of community and peer-to-peer support. Providers can more easily connect between sessions, check in with their supervisors in real-time on specific issues, and gather advice on navigating complex topics.
As we all know, psychiatrists Experiencing burnout and depression Due to the demand caused by the pandemic, it has grown at a considerable rate in recent years. Opportunities to work with patients and colleagues may help relieve some or all of their mental and emotional burden, thereby reducing or preventing burnout.
On the other hand, going into the office could mean getting back into commuting, dressing more formally than you have been in the past two years, and having less time buffer in your schedule. Being away from their home and family and trying to balance these responsibilities can also put more pressure on providers, especially now that most of them are working more hours than ever before.
When weighing options for in-person and virtual work, providers must consider their own needs and concerns in addition to their clients’ needs and concerns.
about Four out of ten adults The U.S. reported symptoms of anxiety or depression during the pandemic, up from one in 10 in 2019. The need for mental and behavioral care is obvious, but the best type of care depends on the patient’s needs and concerns.
For example, a lack of privacy at home or in confined spaces may affect how patients can speak openly with their providers during virtual visits. If someone doesn’t have a private, comfortable space in their home, they may try to get outside or sit in a car, which can lead to a poor internet connection that can be distracting. Some patients may also have difficulty navigating the technology platforms or applications needed to conduct virtual meetings, and it can not only take up time, it can be a distraction—or worse, another type of stress.
While clients of all ages may be distracted by messages, emails, or events in other settings during virtual meetings, children and teens have difficulty staying focused during the challenging work that often occurs in therapy. Virtual therapists compete with video games, texting friends or well-meaning parents. By contrast, children and adolescents often expect safe and supportive spaces when the therapist and child are fully focused on each other during therapy.
But telehealth also has its place—virtual care should take generational considerations into account. Young tech natives often prefer texting or emailing rather than talking on the phone or talking to someone who is live.according to American Hospital Association, Gen Z and millennials are now somewhat resistant to in-person care, with 44% saying they would likely switch providers if telehealth visits were not offered. Virtual care is also available for people who are relatively high-functioning and only have easy access to their providers through direct message exchanges or quick calls during times of stress.
Payers just want to see their members as healthy as possible. Healthy people help reduce the overall cost of healthcare, so it’s a win for everyone that patients become healthier both mentally and physically. That’s why payers are incentivized to support whatever type of care is best for their members, whether delivered in-person or virtually, for better clinical outcomes.
both, and
It’s not an “either-or” situation, but a future of “both”. Strong, high-quality therapeutic relationships can be established both virtually and in person. While each format has its pros and cons, the purpose should not be to substitute one for the other, but to determine which format is best for those looking for help. For the delivery of mental and behavioral healthcare, it’s clear that we need both options, and hopefully together they will help address the many challenges facing our communities and healthcare ecosystems.
Photo: metamorworks, Getty Images
