IntroductionBlended therapies (BT) combine face-to-face (f2f) sessions with internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs). However, the use of blended interventions in routine care is still rare and depends on the acceptance of key health care professionals such as the therapists. Little is yet known about the therapists' perspective on and experiences with blended approaches. The aim of this pilot study was to identify barriers and facilitators, as perceived by psychotherapists, for implementing a blended therapy for depression.MethodsSemi-structured expert interviews were conducted with five therapists, who were part of the German study arm of the FP7-project E-Compared (www.e-compared.eu). All patients (N = 173) were treated in the context of a registered RCT (DRKS00006866) in which the clinical and cost-effectiveness of BT for depression, consisting of ten internet- and mobile-based cognitive behavioral therapy modules and six f2f sessions, was compared to the treatment usually provided by general practitioners. To identify barriers and facilitators an interview guide based on the theoretical domains framework (TDF) was developed. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a qualitative content analysis by two independent coders.ResultsThe results revealed 29 barriers and 33 facilitators, which are hindering or enabling factors on the levels of ‘implementation in the health care system’, ‘therapy’, ‘therapists’ and ‘patients’. Key barriers stated by all therapists were ‘Limited customizability and autonomy of decisions concerning blending the therapy’ (number of statements, k = 44); ‘Disease-related contraindications for BT’ (k = 25); ‘Negative affect was caused by burden through technical problems’ (k = 18); ‘Limited number of f2f sessions hindered the therapy process’; and ‘Establishment of therapeutic alliance was burdened by technical issues’ (each k = 15). Key facilitators stated by all therapists were: ‘Patients’ interest, willingness and motivation to participate’ (k = 22); ‘Patients' access to online content between f2f sessions and after therapy end’ (k = 20); ‘Preset structure of IMI-part guided the treatment course of BT’ (k = 18); and ‘Effective help with BT in a short time frame’ (k = 15), as well as ‘Reduction of the treatment gap’ (k = 13).DiscussionTherapists supported the implementation of BT for depression. Results indicated the consideration of a wide range of determinants: among others, the possibility of individualizing the treatment; the autonomy of decision making in respect to the ratio and number of online and f2f sessions; the necessity of providing training; the need to develop a concept of embedding BT in the health care system and funding the additional effort; and the use of sophisticated technical solutions.

Summary Sleep disturbances and insomnia are common in college students, and reduce their quality of life and academic performance. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological interventions aimed at improving sleep in college students. A meta‐analysis was conducted with 10 randomized controlled trials with passive control conditions (N = 2,408). The overall mean effect size (Hedges’ g) of all sleep‐related outcomes within each trial was moderate to large (g = 0.61; 95% confidence interval: 0.41−0.81; numbers‐needed‐to‐treat = 3). Effect sizes for global measures of sleep disturbances were g = 0.79; 95% confidence interval: 0.52−1.06; and for sleep‐onset latency g = 0.65; 95% confidence interval: 0.36−0.94. The follow‐up analyses revealed an effect size of g = 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.45−0.66 for the combined sleep‐related outcomes based on three studies. No significant covariates were identified. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to an overall substantial risk of bias, and in particular with regard to blinding of participants and personnel. Nevertheless, they provide evidence that psychological interventions for improving sleep are efficacious among college students. Further research should explore long‐term effects and potential moderators of treatment efficacy in college students.

Context: Internet Use Disorder (IUD), characterized as the inability to control one's internet use, is emerging as an increasing societal concern as it is associated with reduced quality of life and mental health comorbidities. Evidence-based treatment options are, however, scarce due to the novelty of the diagnosis. Internet-and mobile-based interventions may be an effective means to deliver psychological treatment to individuals with IUD as they address individuals affected in their online setting. The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of a newly developed, guided internet-and mobile-based intervention for IUD. Methods: In a two-armed randomized controlled trial (N = 130), individuals showing problematic internet use patterns (Internet Addiction Test ≥ 49) will be randomly allocated to the internet-and mobile-based intervention or a waiting control group. Assessments will take place at baseline, 7 weeks, 6-and 12 months after randomization. The primary outcome is internet addiction symptom severity (IAT) at 7 weeks. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and other psychosocial variables associated with IUD. Intervention: The intervention consists of seven sessions: Goal setting and motivational interviewing, impulse control, problem solving, cognitive restructuring, self-worth, relapse prevention, and a booster session. Participants are supported by an eCoach who provides individual feedback after completion of each session. Participants can choose between several elective sessions based on individual need. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate an internet-and mobile-based intervention for IUD, which could be a promising first step to reduce individuals' disease burden. Trial Registration: DRKS00015314. The study is currently ongoing. First participants were enrolled in the study on September 14th 2018. Recruitment will continue approximately through March 2020.