Abstract
BACKGROUND: E-mental health (EMH) interventions are becoming an increasingly common topic of research, including in inpatient settings. These interventions provide accessibility and convenience, empowering individuals to take an active role in managing their mental health. By using personalized tools and resources, digital interventions can enhance the efficacy of delivering mental health care. Ultimately, they could offer a promising solution to the increasing need for mental health services. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the range, extent, and types of digital mental health interventions before, during, and after inpatient care in recent years, and to identify current gaps in the literature. METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, and ScienceGov databases were searched. A second search was conducted in August 2024. The review included peer-reviewed studies published between January 1, 2015, and March 1, 2025, which were identified in 3 search rounds. The studies included adult patients receiving EMH-based care before, during, or after inpatient treatment. Only studies published in English or German and available to the authors were considered. Studies were assessed by 4 independent raters, and key information was summarized in shared documents. RESULTS: Research on digital interventions in the context of inpatient mental health care has been increasing over the years. A total of 90 studies were identified. Some interventions were tested in multiple studies. Most (53/90, 59%) studies involved aftercare or interventions blending digital and face-to-face inpatient treatment. Twenty-six studies included a control group in their examination, and predominantly positive effects of digital inpatient and aftercare interventions were found. In general, positive acceptance was examined among patients and clinicians, which was assessed through questionnaires and interviews. Technical barriers and missing infrastructure were reported. Many studies included small sample sizes (23 studies had below 50 participants). Low adherence was a consistent limitation. Some aspects, such as inpatient preparation and EMH adherence interventions, showed promise, but detailed information was lacking. The majority of studies were carried out in Germany (n=50), followed by the United States (n=11). CONCLUSIONS: Research on the implementation of digital interventions before, during, or after inpatient care has been increasing in recent years, with initial promising results. Studies involving greater sample sizes and studies with more diverse patient groups need to be planned in the future. There are already indications that digital interventions can help maintain treatment benefits and somewhat improve symptoms in patients requiring inpatient treatment. The acceptance of EMH interventions was predominantly moderate to high, with structural issues stated as the most common barrier to use and acceptance.