http://periodicos.uea.edu.br/index.php/cienciasdasaude <div>A <strong>Revista de Ciências da Saúde da Amazônia/Amazonia Health Science Journal</strong>, publicação em fluxo contínuo oficial da Universidade do Estado do Amazonas (UEA), tem como objetivo divulgar artigos científicos que contribuam para o conhecimento acadêmico e profissional das áreas das ciências da saúde.</div> <div> </div> <div><strong>Coordenação:</strong> Profa. Dra. Isolda Prado de Negreiros Nogueira Maduro | <strong>ISSN:</strong> 2447-486X | <strong>Ano de Criação:</strong> 2015 | <strong>Área Temática:</strong> Medicina, Odontologia, Enfermagem, Saúde Coletiva, Biotecnologia, Educação Física, Farmácia, Gerontologia, Fonoaudiologia, Fisioterapia, Nutrição e áreas afins | <strong>Periodicidade</strong>: Fluxo Contínuo.</div> <div> </div> <div><strong>Contato:</strong> rcsa@uea.edu.br </div> Editora Universitária pt-BR Revista de Ciências da Saúde da Amazônia 2447-486X http://periodicos.uea.edu.br/index.php/cienciasdasaude/article/view/5272 <p><strong>Objective</strong>: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of telehealth programs aimed at healthcare workers. <strong>Methods</strong>: This is a systematic review, searching the databases of Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE/PubMed), Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL CCTR/Cochrane Library) and Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS).&nbsp; Randomized clinical trials that investigated the efficacy of telehealth aimed at health professionals were included. The outcome analyzed was the improvement of mental health among healthcare professionals. The Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials 2.0 was applied to assess the risk of bias. Two randomized clinical trials with low risk of bias were analyzed. <strong>Results</strong>: Two randomized clinical trials were analyzed, both with a low risk of bias. One study showed a significant difference in favor of the interactive platform’s intervention group after 6 months (- 0.96; 95% CI, -1.52 to -0.40) and 9 months (-1.14; 95% CI, -1.69 to - 0.58). In the other study, no significant difference was found between the groups after two weeks (- 0.04; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.04; P = 0.15). A subgroup analysis of participants taking psychotropic drugs showed a significant difference between the groups in favor of the app intervention group (-0.29; 95% CI -0.48 to -0.09; P = 0.004). <strong>Discussion</strong>: In both studies, there was no significant difference between the groups for the Burnout and Stress outcomes. <strong>Conclusion</strong>: There are initial evidences with a low risk of bias that telehealth is not effective in interventions for improving mental health of healthcare professionals.</p> Simone Maria de Oliveira Silva Julita Maria Freitas Coelho Amália Ivine Costa Santana Kairo Silvestre Meneses Damasceno Matheus dos Santos Ferreira Magno Merces Copyright (c) 2026 Revista de Ciências da Saúde da Amazônia 2026-06-10 2026-06-10 4 2 3 22 10.59666/rcsa.v4i2.5272