No abstract

Sexual dysfunctions are highly prevalent and undertreated. Internet- and mobile-based psychological interventions (IMIs) could be a promising addition to close this treatment gap, given their accessibility, anonymity, and scalability. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the efficacy of IMIs for sexual dysfunctions. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in August 2021 on randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of IMIs on sexual functioning and satisfaction compared to a control condition. Twelve RCTs with 14 comparisons were reviewed with six IMIs targeting female and six IMIs targeting male sexual dysfunctions and n = 952 participants were evaluated in the meta-analysis. IMIs were significantly more effective than control conditions (k = 11 waitlist control group, k = 3 online discussion board) at post-treatment for female sexual functioning (g = 0.59, CI: 0.28–0.90, I2 = 0%) and satisfaction (g = 0.90, CI: 0.02–1.79, I2 = 82%), and male sexual functioning (g = 0.18, CI: 0.02–0.34, I2 = 0%). No significant effect was found for male sexual satisfaction (g = 0.69, CI: −0.13–1.51, I2 = 88%) with substantial heterogeneity in studies. Most studies showed high dropout, with ten studies indicating some concern of risk of bias, and two studies showing high risk of bias. The results suggest that IMIs can be an effective treatment for sexual dysfunctions, although additional high-quality research is needed. Given the limited availability of specialized treatment for sexual dysfunctions and individual preferences for discrete treatment options, IMIs seem to be a valuable addition to routine care, empowering individuals to promote their sexual health on a guided self-help basis.

IntroductionThe integration of a web-based computer-adaptive patient-reported outcome test (CAT) platform with persuasive design optimised features including recommendations for action into routine healthcare could provide a promising way to translate reliable diagnostic results into action. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of such a platform for depression and anxiety (RehaCAT+) compared with the standard diagnostic system (RehaCAT) in cardiological and orthopaedic health clinics in routine care.Methods and analysisA two-arm, pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial will be conducted. Twelve participating rehabilitation clinics in Germany will be randomly assigned to a control (RehaCAT) or experimental group (RehaCAT+) in a 1:1 design. A total sample of 1848 participants will be recruited across all clinics. The primary outcome, depression severity at 12 months follow-up (T3), will be assessed using the CAT Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Emotional Distress-Depression Item set. Secondary outcomes are depression at discharge (T1) and 6 months follow-up (T2) as well as anxiety, satisfaction with participation in social roles and activities, pain impairment, fatigue, sleep, health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, physical functioning, alcohol, personality and health economic-specific general quality of life and socioeconomic cost and benefits at T1-3. User behaviour, acceptance, facilitating and hindering factors will be assessed with semistructured qualitative interviews. Additionally, a smart sensing substudy will be conducted, with daily ecological momentary assessments and passive collection of smartphone usage variables. Data analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle with additional per-protocol analyses. Cost-effectiveness analyses will be conducted from a societal perspective and the perspective of the statutory pension insurance.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The Ethics Committee of Ulm University, has approved the study (on 24 February 2021 ref. 509/20). Written informed consent will be obtained for all participants. Results will be published via peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberDRKS00027447

No abstract