Needs and Demands for e-Health Symptom Management Interventions in Patients with Post-COVID-19 Condition: A User-Centered Design Approach.

Introduction: Post-COVID-19 is an increasing chronic disease for which potential treatment options require further development and examination. A well-established approach to symptom management in post-COVID-19 patients could be e-Health interventions. To enhance the implementation and utilization of e-Health interventions, the needs and demands of patients should be taken into consideration. The aim of this study was to investigate needs and demands of post-COVID-19 patients concerning e-Health symptom management interventions. Methods: A total of 556 patients participated in this cross-sectional online survey study. Recruitment was performed from January 19 to May 24, 2022. Data related to the needs and demands for e-Health interventions were analyzed, along with medical and sociodemographic information. Results: The majority of the patients preferred interventions accessible on smartphones (95.3%). The favored content formats were applications (82.7%), interactive training (69.3%), or audio and video materials (61.1%). Furthermore, the preferred session length was about 10-20 min. The most desired topics included "quality of life," "information about how intensively I may exert myself or do sports," "adjustment to new life situation," and "handling physical changes." Conclusions: This study provides a detailed framework for the content and design of e-Health interventions to support patients managing their post-COVID-19 symptoms. The findings could significantly influence the further development of tailored e-Health interventions to address this pressing global health concern.

Assessing Electronic Health Literacy in Individuals With the Post-COVID-19 Condition Using the German Revised eHealth Literacy Scale: Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: The eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) is a widely used instrument for measuring eHealth literacy (eHL). However, little is known so far about whether the instrument is valid for the assessment of eHL in persons who are affected by the post-COVID-19 condition. This is particularly important as people with the post-COVID-19 condition are frequently affected by false information from the internet. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the German Revised eHealth Literacy Scale (GR-eHEALS) in individuals with the post-COVID-19 condition. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to May 2022. The self-assessment survey consisted of the GR-eHEALS, health status- and internet use-related variables, sociodemographic data, and (post)-COVID-19-related medical data. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), correlational analyses, and tests of measurement invariance were deployed. RESULTS: In total, 330 participants were included in the statistical analyses. CFA revealed that the 2-factor model reached an excellent model fit (comparative fit index=1.00, Tucker-Lewis index=0.99, root mean square error of approximation=0.036, standardized root mean square residual=0.038). Convergent validity was confirmed by significant positive correlations between eHL and knowledge of internet-based health promotion programs, experience in using these programs, and the duration of private internet use. In addition, a significantly negative relationship of eHL with internet anxiety supported convergent validity. Further, significant relationships of eHL with mental health status and internal health locus of control confirmed the criterion validity of the instrument. However, relationships of eHL with physical health status and quality of life could not be confirmed. The 2-factor model was fully measurement invariant regarding gender. Regarding age and educational level, partial measurement invariance was confirmed. The subscales as well as the overall GR-eHEALS reached good-to-excellent reliability (Cronbach α≥.86). CONCLUSIONS: The GR-eHEALS is a reliable and largely valid instrument for assessing eHL in individuals with the post-COVID-19 condition. Measurement invariance regarding gender was fully confirmed and allows the interpretation of group differences. Regarding age and educational level, group differences should be interpreted with caution. Given the high likelihood that individuals with the post-COVID-19 condition will be confronted with misinformation on the Internet, eHL is a core competency that is highly relevant in this context, in both research and clinical practice. Therefore, future research should also explore alternative instruments to capture eHL to overcome shortcomings in the validity of the GR-eHEALS.

Acceptance, drivers, and barriers to use eHealth interventions in patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome for management of post-COVID-19 symptoms: a cross-sectional study.

Background: Post-COVID-19 syndrome is a new and debilitating disease without adequate treatment options. eHealth could be a reasonable approach for symptom management. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the acceptance for eHealth interventions for symptom management in individuals with post-COVID-19 syndrome, as well as drivers and barriers influencing acceptance. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: This study was conducted from January 19 until 24 May 2022. Recruitment took place with a web-based survey. Acceptance and predictors of eHealth interventions were measured by the extended UTAUT model. Included in the model were the core predictor performance expectancy, social influence, and effort expectancy. Previously diagnosed mental illness was estimated and mental health by using the well-established Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 and the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale. The effect of sociodemographic and medical data was assessed. Multiple hierarchical regression analyses as well as group comparisons were performed. Results: 342 individuals with post-COVID-19 syndrome were examined. The acceptance of eHealth interventions for symptom management was moderate to high (M = 3.60, SD = 0.89). Acceptance was significantly higher in individuals with lower/other education, patients with moderate to severe symptoms during initial COVID-19 infection, still significantly impaired patients, and individuals with a mental illness. Identified predictors of acceptance were age (ß = .24, p < .001), current condition including moderate (ß = .49, p = .002) and still significantly impaired (ß = .67, p < .001), digital confidence (ß = .19, p < .001), effort expectancy (ß = .26, p < .001), performance expectancy (ß = .33, p < .001), and social influence (ß = .26, p < .001). Conclusion: Patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome reported a satisfying level of acceptance and drivers and barriers could be identified. These factors need to be considered for the implementation and future use of eHealth interventions.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic causes a dysfunctional dietary behavior: A German cross-sectional study.

Background: Since the COVID-19 pandemic has been affected our daily lives, the global population has been exposed to permanent concerns and thus might suffer from the psychological burden. It is well known that psychological burdens can affect dietary behavior. Aim: The impact of a psychological burden on people, and in particular on their dietary patterns was investigated in this nationawide cross-sectional study. Methods: 7525 participants responded to the questionnaire regarding the psychological burden concerning the COVID-19 pandemic and their current dietary structure with changes in the pattern and food amount (between November 2020 and March 2021). Results: A pandemic-related dysfunction of dietary behavior was found. Some participants reported restrictive (conscious) food intake and as well impulsive food intake, which can be described as dysfunctional eating behaviors. In particular, younger persons and individuals who claimed an increased psychological burden reported dysfunctional dietary behavior. Data clearly show that psychological burdens affect an individual's dietary behavior. Conclusion: Public health strategies have to be developed to support individuals at risk to improve coping strategies. The long-term aim should be avoiding the maintenance of dysfunctional dietary behavior.

COVID-19 Vaccine for Children: Determinants and Beliefs Contributing to Vaccination Decision of Parents in Germany 2021/2022.

To reduce the number of COVID-19 cases, vaccines were rapidly made available worldwide. For a strategically targeted response to the COVID-19 pandemic, population vaccination coverage was to be maximized. The target groups also included healthy children. In this context, it is important to understand the determinants and beliefs that lead parents to favor or oppose COVID-19 immunization in children. This study aimed to investigate parents' COVID-19 vaccination willingness in Germany for children aged 5-11 years in 2021/2022. For this purpose, the determinants and beliefs behind parents' vaccination decisions were examined. Descriptive analysis and bivariate correlations were performed on COVID-19 vaccination willingness and parents' mental health status, general vaccination attitudes, and SARS-CoV-2 politics perceptions. In total, 2401 participants fully participated in this cross-sectional study. The COVID-19 vaccination uptake (71.4%) outweighed the vaccination refusal (19.4%). Correlations revealed higher vaccine acceptance in parents presenting full vaccination certificates (90.9%), COVID-19 immunizations (99.9%), or increased COVID-19 fear (93.6%). Vaccination-refusal was associated with higher perceived pressure by COVID-19 vaccination campaigns (87.7%), higher experienced restrictions due to COVID-19 protective measures in parents' social environment (83.6%), and engagement against COVID-19 protective measures (51.6%). Besides general anxiety, no significant correlations were observed between parents' mental health variables and vaccination willingness. Although several factors are ultimately associated with vaccination willingness, future vaccination campaigns should prioritize reducing pressure, increasing trust, and considering parents' differentiation between familiar and unfamiliar pathogens during their vaccination decision-making process.

Fear of Death during COVID-19 Does Not Explain Post-Infection Depression Symptoms beyond Reported Symptoms during the Infection in COVID-19 Survivors.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented global burden to the general population and, in particular, to individuals who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2. In the context of the discussion about "post COVID-19", the aim of the study was to advance research on mental health and long-term consequences after COVID-19. In total, 214 COVID-19 survivors (female: 54.2%; hospitalized: 36.7%) participated in the repeated cross-sectional assessment. In addition to demographic data, mental and somatic symptoms, fear of death at the time of infection, and depressive (PHQ-8) and generalized anxiety symptoms (GAD-7) were assessed. Results showed an increased prevalence of depressive symptoms and symptoms of generalized anxiety compared to observations in the general population prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological symptoms of depression and reported levels of fear of death during the SARS-CoV-2 infection showed a negative association with the time interval since COVID-19 diagnosis. Furthermore, although fear of death during the acute COVID-19 was related to depression and generalized anxiety, this association was predominantly explained by the presence of mental and somatic symptoms. In conclusion, initial fear of death does not impact mental health beyond the overall symptom burden. Furthermore, depressive symptoms appear to vanish across time since infection.

Post-COVID-19 Syndrome is Rarely Associated with Damage of the Nervous System: Findings from a Prospective Observational Cohort Study in 171 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can affect multiple organs. Reports of persistent or newly emergent symptoms, including those related to the nervous system, have increased over the course of the pandemic, leading to the introduction of post-COVID-19 syndrome. However, this novel syndrome is still ill-defined and structured objectification of complaints is scarce. Therefore, we performed a prospective observational cohort study to better define and validate subjective neurological disturbances in patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome. METHODS: A total of 171 patients fulfilling the post-COVID-19 WHO Delphi consensus criteria underwent a comprehensive neurological diagnostic work-up including neurovascular, electrophysiological, and blood analysis. In addition, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and lumbar puncture were conducted in subgroups of patients. Furthermore, patients underwent neuropsychological, psychosomatic, and fatigue assessment. RESULTS: Patients were predominantly female, middle-aged, and had incurred mostly mild-to-moderate acute COVID-19. The most frequent post-COVID-19 complaints included fatigue, difficulties in concentration, and memory deficits. In most patients (85.8%), in-depth neurological assessment yielded no pathological findings. In 97.7% of the cases, either no diagnosis other than post COVID-19 syndrome, or no diagnosis likely related to preceding acute COVID-19 could be established. Sensory or motor complaints were more often associated with a neurological diagnosis other than post-COVID-19 syndrome. Previous psychiatric conditions were identified as a risk factor for developing post-COVID-19 syndrome. We found high somatization scores in our patient group that correlated with cognitive deficits and the extent of fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Albeit frequently reported by patients, objectifiable affection of the nervous system is rare in post-COVID-19 syndrome. Instead, elevated levels of somatization point towards a pathogenesis potentially involving psychosomatic factors. However, thorough neurological assessment is important in this patient group in order to not miss neurological diseases other than post-COVID-19.

Addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Immunization programmes have been globally recognized as one of the most successful medical interventions against infectious diseases. Despite the proven efficacy and safety profiles of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, there are still a substantial number of people who express vaccine hesitancy. Factors that influence vaccine decision-making are heterogenous, complex, and context specific and may be caused or amplified by uncontrolled online information or misinformation. With respect to COVID-19, the recent emergence of novel variants of concern that give rise to milder disease also drives vaccine hesitancy. Healthcare professionals remain one of the most trusted groups to advise and provide information to those ambivalent about COVID-19 vaccination and should be equipped with adequate resources and information as well as practical guidance to empower them to effectively discuss concerns. This article seeks to summarize the currently available information to address the most common concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19-Related Burden and Risk Perception in Individuals with Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy and Multifocal Motor Neuropathy: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated the mental health burden of patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) or multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to matched healthy controls. METHODS: The cross-sectional study included 59 patients with a diagnosis of either CIDP or MMN and 59 propensity score matched healthy controls. All participants completed a survey including demographics, distress (distress thermometer), depressive symptoms (PHQ-2), generalized anxiety (GAD-7), COVID-19-related fear, and risk perception. Additionally, patients with CIDP or MMN were asked about the frequency and type of infections since treatment initiation. RESULTS: Patients with either CIDP or MMN reported experiencing reduced frequency or no differences in infection frequency since immune medication was initiated. Regarding COVID-19, patients with CIDP or MMN rated their risk of infection similar to healthy controls, while they expected a higher probability of the occurrence of symptoms, severe course, and dying of COVID-19. They reported increased depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety, and COVID-19-related fear in comparison to healthy controls. CONCLUSION: Despite their personal experience of reduced frequency of infection since immune medication was initiated, patients with CIDP or MMN reported increased risk perception and prevalence of depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety, and COVID-19-related fear in comparison to healthy controls. This highlights the need for evidence-driven strategies to protect the mental health of this vulnerable group.

Increased Safety Behavior and COVID-19-Related Fear in Adults with Cystic Fibrosis during the Pandemic.

People with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) face great challenges during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Recent research found equal levels of distress in pwCF and healthy controls (HC). The current study aimed to investigate the mental health burden and safety behavior in pwCF. Sixty-nine adult pwCF and sixty-nine propensity-score-matched HC participated in this study. Participants completed an anonymous online questionnaire assessing distress, generalized anxiety, depressive symptoms, COVID-19-related variables, self-reported adherent safety behavior (ASB), and dysfunctional safety behavior (DSB). PwCF showed equal amounts of distress (W = 2481.0, p = 0.669), depressive symptoms (W = 2632.5, p = 0.268), and generalized anxiety symptoms (W = 2515.5, p = 0.565) compared to the HC. COVID-19-related fear (W = 1872.0, p = 0.028), ASB (W = 1630.0, p = 0.001), and DSB (W = 1498.5, p < 0.001) were significantly elevated in pwCF. The pwCF estimated that the probability of suffering from symptoms (W = 954.5, p < 0.001), experiencing a severe course (W = 806.5, p < 0.001), or dying (W = 1079.0, p < 0.001) from COVID-19 is significantly higher than that of the HC. ASB was associated with a CF diagnosis, COVID-19-related fear, and a subjective level of information (R2 = 0.414, F(13, 124) = 6.936, p ≤ 0.001). DSB was associated with a diagnosis of CF and COVID-19-related fear (R2 = 0.196, F(13, 124) = 3.169, p ≤ 0.001). The data suggest that pwCF show functional and adequate behaviors towards the risk caused by the pandemic. Therefore, functional coping behaviors may provide advantages in addressing pandemic challenges.

Levels, Predictors, and Distribution of Interpersonal Solidarity during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Since introducing the first non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to decelerate the spread of the virus, European governments have highlighted the role of "solidarity". However, the role and levels of solidarity, especially during the past lockdowns, is uncertain. The present study thus explores the levels, the role, and the distribution of received and demonstrated interpersonal solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic. This pooled cross-sectional study was conducted from March 2020 to March 2021 in Germany, including 19,977 participants. Levels of solidarity between the first and the second lockdowns in Germany were compared, possible predictors were examined, and three clusters were defined to unveil distributional patterns of solidarity reception and/or demonstration. To compare solidarity levels between the first and the second lockdowns in Germany, a dummy-coded lockdown variable was introduced and regressed on the two solidarity items. To identify predictors of received and demonstrated solidarity, two multiple linear regression models were computed, testing several demographic and psychological factors. For further exploratory analyses, clusters of "helpers", "non-helpers", and "help-receivers and helpers" were computed based on a k-means cluster analysis. Results revealed a lower level of solidarity during the second lockdown compared with the first one. Demonstrated solidarity was positively predicted by adherent safety behavior to avoid COVID-19 infection and by middle age, and negatively by depression symptoms, male gender, and high age. Received solidarity was positively predicted by higher age, by both adherent and dysfunctional safety behavior in avoidance of COVID-19 infection, and by lower educational level. "Helpers" reported little received solidarity but demonstrated high solidarity, "non-helpers" showed both little demonstrated and received solidarity, and "help-receivers and helpers" showed middle-high received and demonstrated solidarity. The three clusters differed the most regarding the variables of age, adherent and dysfunctional safety behavior, fear of COVID-19, subjective risk perceptions regarding contraction of COVID-19 and the respective consequences, and trust in governmental interventions in response to COVID-19. The decrease in interpersonal solidarity over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as its predictors, should be considered regarding prospective impositions. Furthermore, as depressive symptoms were identified to negatively predict interpersonal solidarity, the adequate provision of mental health services, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, becomes even more important.

Mental health burden of patients with diabetes before and after the initial outbreak of COVID-19: predictors of mental health impairment.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting people's mental health worldwide. Patients with diabetes are at risk for a severe course of illness when infected with SARS-CoV-2. The present study aims to retrospectively examine mental health changes in patients with diabetes in Germany before and after the initial COVID-19 outbreak, and to furthermore explore potential predictors of such changes. METHODS: Over the course of eight weeks from April to June 2020, 253 individuals diagnosed with diabetes participated in an online cross-sectional study. Participants completed an anonymous survey including demographics, depression (PHQ-2) and generalized anxiety symptoms (GAD-2), distress (DT), and health status (EQ-5D-3L). In addition, all instruments used were modified to retrospectively ask participants to recall their mental health and health status before the outbreak had started. Additionally examined factors were COVID-19-related fear, trust in governmental actions to face the pandemic, and the subjective level of information about COVID-19. RESULTS: This study shows a significant increase in prevalence of depression symptoms, generalized anxiety symptoms and distress, as well as significantly decreased health statuses in diabetes patients after the initial COVID-19 outbreak. Increased depression symptoms, generalized anxiety symptoms and distress were predicted by COVID-19-related fear, whereas trust in governmental actions to face COVID-19 predicted higher depression symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate a negative impact of the initial COVID-19 outbreak on mental health and health status in patients with diabetes. In order to improve the efficacy of psychological support strategies for diabetes patients during the pandemic, possible predictors of mental health impairment such as the aforementioned should be examined more thoroughly and addressed more openly.

Evaluation of the E-Mental Health Mindfulness-Based and Skills-Based "CoPE It" Intervention to Reduce Psychological Distress in Times of COVID-19: Results of a Bicentre Longitudinal Study.

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic poses immense challenges for health care systems and population-wide mental health. The e-mental health intervention "CoPE It" has been developed to offer standardized and manualized support to overcome psychological distress caused by the pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of "CoPE It" in terms of reducing distress (primary outcome), depression and anxiety symptoms, and improving self-efficacy, and mindfulness (secondary outcomes). Furthermore, the intervention's usability, feasibility, and participants' satisfaction with "CoPE It" was evaluated (tertiary outcome). The study protocol has been published previously. Methods: A bicentre longitudinal study was conducted from April 27th 2020 to May 3rd 2021. N = 110 participants were included in the analyses. The intervention consisted of four modules featuring different media promoting evidence-based methods of cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness-based stress reduction. Difference in psychological distress between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1) were analyzed by repeated measure analysis of covariance. Mixed linear models were applied to assess moderating effects. Depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety symptoms, self-efficacy, and mindfulness were compared between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1) via t-tests. Usability of the "CoPE It" intervention and participants' satisfaction was evaluated by calculation means and frequencies. Results: Primary outcome: A significant effect of time on psychological distress at post-intervention (T1) after controlling for age, gender, education, mental illness and attitudes toward online interventions was found. Depressive and anxiety symptoms, and mindfulness were a significant moderators of the relationship between time and psychological distress for consistent wording. Secondary outcomes: There was a significant decrease in depressive symptoms and generalized anxiety, and a significant increase in self-efficacy and mindfulness between baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1). Tertiary outcomes: 95.83% of the participants thought the "CoPE It" intervention was easy to use and 87.50% were satisfied with the "CoPE It" intervention in an overall, general sense. Conclusion: The e-mental health "CoPE It" intervention seems to be an effective approach in reducing psychological distress, anxiety and depressive symptoms, and in enhancing self-efficacy and mindfulness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants' satisfaction and the program's feasibility, and usability were proven to be high. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: DRKS00021301.

Changes in Substance Use and Mental Health Burden among Women during the Second Wave of COVID-19 in Germany.

Unlike men, who are disproportionately affected by severe disease progression and mortality from COVID-19, women may be more affected by the economic, social and psychological consequences of the pandemic. Psychological distress and mental health problems are general risk factors for increases in the use of alcohol and other substances as a dysfunctional coping mechanism. METHODS: An analysis was carried out of the female subset (n = 2153) of a population-based, cross-sectional online survey (October-December 2020), covering the "second wave" of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. RESULTS: Among women, 23% increased their alcohol use, 28.4% increased their nicotine use and 44% increased their illicit substance use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Twenty percent reported major depressive symptoms and 23.4% symptoms of generalized anxiety. Generalized anxiety proved to be a significant predictor of increases in alcohol and nicotine use in logistic regression. DISCUSSION: The mental health burden remained high during the second wave of COVID-19 and alcohol, nicotine and other substance use increased. However, the association between mental health and substance use was weak. Psychological distress does not seem to be the main motivator of substance use.

COVID-19-Fear Affects Current Safety Behavior Mediated by Neuroticism-Results of a Large Cross-Sectional Study in Germany.

Objectives: Although many research studies concerning changes in personality and behavior in time of COVID-19 pandemic emerged, important questions still have not been answered. This study with a large sample aimed to give insights into the impact of personality on pandemic fear and behavior by investigating the Big Five traits, COVID-19-fear, and associated behavioral changes in a large German-speaking sample. Methods: About 14,048 healthy respondents (65.5% female, 34.2% male, and 0.32% other gender/gender queer; range = 18-85 years, median age 35-44 years) participated in the survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. Two scales, "adherent" safety behavior (ASB, α = 0.857) and "dysfunctional" safety behavior (DSB, α = 0.876), three items each, measured pandemic-associated behavior. The Big Five Inventory-10 (BFI-10) tested personality traits. Results: While ASB correlated negatively with extraversion (rho = -0.053, ≤ 0.001), the other four traits were positively associated, with the highest association for neuroticism (rho = 0.116, ≤ 0.001), whereas neuroticism showed a positive correlation (rho = 0.142, ≤ 0.001) with DSB, extraversion (rho = -0.042, ≤ 0.001), agreeableness (rho = -0.028, ≤ 0.001), and conscientiousness (rho = -0.025, ≤ 0.001) correlated negatively with it. Regression analyses showed a small extent of the effect of personality traits. Moreover, neuroticism mediated the association between COVID-19-fear and DSB (positive-directed). Conclusions: Even though our results on correlations between personality, pandemic fear, and related behavior are in line with the existing literature studies, the analyses clearly show that the impact of personality traits, including neuroticism, on pandemic behavior is very small. Rather, pandemic fear has a much larger influence on the safety behavior mediated through neuroticism. Further studies should bear in mind that personality traits can not only have influencing effects but also mediating effects.

Determining Acceptance of e-Mental Health Interventions in Digital Psychodiabetology Using a Quantitative Web-Based Survey: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a very common chronic disease that exerts massive physiological and psychological burdens on patients. The digitalization of mental health care has generated effective e-mental health approaches, which offer an indubitable practical value for patient treatment. However, before implementing and optimizing e-mental health tools, their acceptance and underlying barriers and resources should be first determined for developing and establishing effective patient-oriented interventions. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the acceptance of e-mental health interventions among patients with diabetes and explore its underlying barriers and resources. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Germany from April 9, 2020, to June 15, 2020, through a web-based survey for which patients were recruited via web-based diabetes channels. The eligibility requirements were adult age (18 years or older), a good command of the German language, internet access, and a diagnosis of diabetes. Acceptance was measured using a modified questionnaire, which was based on the well-established Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and assessed health-related internet use, acceptance of e-mental health interventions, and its barriers and resources. Mental health was measured using validated and established instruments, namely the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-2, and Distress Thermometer. In addition, sociodemographic and medical data regarding diabetes were collected. RESULTS: Of the 340 participants who started the survey, 261 (76.8%) completed it and the final sample comprised 258 participants with complete data sets. The acceptance of e-mental health interventions in patients with diabetes was overall moderate (mean 3.02, SD 1.14). Gender and having a mental disorder had a significant influence on acceptance (P<.001). In an extended UTAUT regression model (UTAUT predictors plus sociodemographics and mental health variables), distress (ß=.11; P=.03) as well as the UTAUT predictors performance expectancy (ß=.50; P<.001), effort expectancy (ß=.15; P=.001), and social influence (ß=.28; P<.001) significantly predicted acceptance. The comparison between an extended UTAUT regression model (13 predictors) and the UTAUT-only regression model (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence) revealed no significant difference in explained variance (F10,244=1.567; P=.12). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the viability of the UTAUT model and its predictors in assessing the acceptance of e-mental health interventions among patients with diabetes. Three UTAUT predictors reached a notable amount of explained variance of 75% in the acceptance, indicating that it is a very useful and efficient method for measuring e-mental health intervention acceptance in patients with diabetes. Owing to the close link between acceptance and use, acceptance-facilitating interventions focusing on these three UTAUT predictors should be fostered to bring forward the highly needed establishment of effective e-mental health interventions in psychodiabetology.