Patients' Needs and Requirements for eHealth Pain Management Interventions: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence supports the potential effectiveness of electronic health (eHealth) interventions in managing chronic pain. However, research on the needs and preferences of patients with chronic pain in relation to eHealth interventions is scarce. Eliciting user input in the development of eHealth interventions may be a crucial step toward developing meaningful interventions for patients for potentially improving treatment outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the experiences of patients with chronic pain with regard to information and communication technology, understand how an eHealth intervention can support the everyday needs and challenges of patients with chronic pain, and identify possible facilitators and barriers for patients' use of an eHealth pain management intervention. METHODS: Twenty patients living with chronic pain and five spouses participated in individual interviews. Semistructured interview guides were used to explore participants' needs, experiences, and challenges in daily life as well as their information and communication technology experiences and preferences for eHealth support interventions. Spouses were recruited and interviewed to gain additional insight into the patients' needs. The study used qualitative thematic analysis. RESULTS: The participants were generally experienced technology users and reported using apps regularly. They were mainly in favor of using an eHealth self-management intervention for chronic pain and considered it a potentially acceptable way of gathering knowledge and support for pain management. The participants expressed the need for obtaining more information and knowledge, establishing a better balance in everyday life, and receiving support for improving communication and social participation. They provided suggestions for the eHealth intervention content and functionality to address these needs. Accessibility, personalization, and usability were emphasized as important elements for an eHealth support tool. The participants described an ideal eHealth intervention as one that could be used for support and distraction from pain, at any time or in any situation, regardless of varying pain intensity and concentration capacity. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into user preferences for eHealth interventions aiming to address self-management for chronic pain. Participants highlighted important factors to be considered when designing and developing eHealth interventions for self-management of chronic pain, illustrating the importance and benefit of including users in the development of eHealth interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03705104; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03705104.

Benefits, Recruitment, Dropout, and Acceptability of the Strength Back Digital Health Intervention for Patients Undergoing Spinal Surgery: Nonrandomized, Qualitative, and Quantitative Pilot Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing spinal surgery report high levels of insecurity, pain, stress, and anxiety before and after surgery. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that surgery will resolve all issues; postsurgical recovery often entails moderate to severe postoperative pain, and some patients undergoing spinal surgery do not experience (long-term) pain relief after surgery. Therefore, focusing on sustainable coping skills and resilience is crucial for these patients. A digital health intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) and positive psychology (PP) was developed to enhance psychological flexibility and well-being and reduce postsurgical pain. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was 3-fold: to explore the potential benefits for patients undergoing spinal surgery of the digital ACT and PP intervention Strength Back (research question [RQ] 1), explore the feasibility of a future randomized controlled trial in terms of recruitment and dropout (RQ 2), and assess the acceptability of Strength Back by patients undergoing spinal surgery (RQ 3). METHODS: We used a nonrandomized experimental design with an intervention group (n=17) and a control group (n=20). To explore the potential benefits of the intervention, participants in both groups filled out questionnaires before and after surgery. These questionnaires included measurements of pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale), pain interference (Multidimensional Pain Inventory), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), valued living (Engaged Living Scale), psychological flexibility (Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale), and mental well-being (Mental Health Continuum-Short Form). Semistructured interviews combined with log data and scores on the Twente Engagement With eHealth Technologies Scale were used to assess the acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: A significant improvement over time in emotional (V=99; P=.03) and overall (V=55; P=.004) well-being (Mental Health Continuum-Short Form) was observed only in the intervention group. In addition, the intervention group showed a significantly larger decline in pain intensity (Numeric Pain Rating Scale) than did the control group (U=75; P=.003). Of the available weekly modules on average 80% (12/15) was completed by patients undergoing spinal fusion and 67% (6/9) was completed by patients undergoing decompression surgery. A total of 68% (17/25) of the participants used the intervention until the final interview. Most participants (15/17, 88%) in the intervention group would recommend the intervention to future patients. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot feasibility study showed that combining ACT and PP in a digital health intervention is promising for patients undergoing spinal surgery as the content was accepted by most of the participants and (larger) improvements in pain intensity and well-being were observed in the intervention group. A digital intervention for patients undergoing (spinal) surgery can use teachable moments, when patients are open to learning more about the surgery and rehabilitation afterward. A larger randomized controlled trial is now warranted.

Digital Self-Management in Support of Patients Living With Chronic Pain: Feasibility Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain can be complex and taxing to live with, and treatment and support require a multicomponent approach, which may not always be offered or available. Smartphones, tablets, and personal computers are already incorporated into patients' daily lives, and therefore, they can be used to communicate, educate, and support self-management. Although some web-based self-management interventions exist, research examining the evidence and effect of digital solutions supporting self-management for patients living with chronic pain is limited, findings are inconclusive, and new innovative ideas and solutions are needed. OBJECTIVE: This feasibility pilot study aimed to explore the system use, perceived usefulness, ease of use, and preliminary effects of EPIO, an app-based cognitive-behavioral pain self-management intervention program for patients living with chronic pain. METHODS: The EPIO intervention was delivered in a blended-care model containing (1) one face-to-face introduction session, (2) nine cognitive behavior-based pain self-management modules, delivered in an app-based format for smartphones or tablets, and (3) one follow-up phone call at 2 to 3 weeks after the introduction session. Patients living with chronic pain (N=50) completed pre-post outcome measures at baseline and 3 months after the introduction session, with registration of system use (ie, log data) until 6 months. The use, perceived usefulness, and ease of use of the EPIO program were examined through system use data, as well as a study-specific use/usability questionnaire and the System Usability Scale (SUS). Outcome measures to test feasibility of use and estimate preliminary effects included the Brief Pain Inventory, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Self-Regulatory Fatigue scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire. RESULTS: Participants (N=50) had a median age of 52 years (range 29-74 years) at inclusion and were mainly female (40/50, 80%). Thirty-one participants completed at least six of the nine modules within the 3-month study period (62% completion rate). Forty-five participants completed outcome measures at 3 months, and the EPIO program was rated as useful (ie, "totally agree" or "agree"; 39/45, 87%) and easy to use (42/45, 93%), and as having easily understandable exercises (44/45, 98%). The average overall system usability (SUS) score was 85.7, indicating grade A and excellent system usability. Preliminary psychosocial outcome measure estimates showed primarily nonsignificant pre-post intervention improvements at 3 months, but with significant positive effects related to some aspects of HRQoL (bodily pain, P=.02 and change, P=.049). CONCLUSIONS:  Digital self-management intervention programs may be of use and support for patients living with chronic pain. In this feasibility study, EPIO showed an acceptable program completion rate and was rated as useful and easy to use, with excellent user satisfaction. Program optimization and efficacy testing in a large-scale randomized controlled trial are warranted and in progress. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03705104; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03705104.

Development and Pilot Evaluation of an Online Relapse-Prevention Program Based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Chronic Pain Patients.

BACKGROUND: A significant number of chronic pain patients experience a decline in therapeutic effects after rehabilitation. As face-to-face contacts with health care professionals are not always feasible after treatment, new, innovative, fully automated relapse-prevention programs are highly needed. OBJECTIVE: In this study an online, automated relapse-prevention program based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)-both as a website and as a mobile app-was developed and evaluated. At each step of the development, end users (ie, chronic pain patients) were consulted in order to fully address their needs. METHODS: In a step-by-step process, a contextual inquiry, requirement specification, and design were executed with chronic pain patients by conducting, respectively, a focus group (n=10), interviews with rapid prototyping (n=28), and a user- and expert-based usability evaluation (n=14). Furthermore, a pilot evaluation was conducted with 14 chronic pain or fatigue patients who had received the online relapse-prevention program following a multidisciplinary ACT treatment. They were interviewed about their usage and the usefulness of the program in supporting them to maintain changed behaviors and prevent relapses in avoidance and pain control behaviors. RESULTS: The three stages provided information about the expected needs of end users, comments about the usefulness of the proposed features, and feedback about the design and usability of the program. This resulted in a fully operational, online relapse-prevention program. Results from the pilot evaluation showed that 9 patients used the online program after treatment, 5 of whom indicated that the program supported them after treatment. Of all the patients, 4 of them indicated that the program did not support them because they wanted more social interaction with other users. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that an innovative, automated, online program that is user friendly can be developed by involving the end users in each step. The program was evaluated positively by some participants. The evaluation showed that the online relapse-prevention program has the potential to support chronic pain patients in maintaining their changed behaviors and preventing relapses in avoidance and pain control behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register (NTR) Number: NTR4177; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4177 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6Ur6EFD1D).

Needs and Preferences of Partners of Cancer Patients Regarding a Web-Based Psychological Intervention: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based, easily accessible, supportive interventions for partners of cancer patients are limited, despite the fact that they often suffer from diminished emotional, social, physical, and relational functioning. To develop a new intervention that will fit their demands, it is important to consult potential users. OBJECTIVE: To examine partners' interest in a Web-based psychological intervention and to identify their needs and wishes regarding such an intervention. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 16 partners of cancer patients, who varied in terms of age, gender, education, employment, type, and stage of disease. Partners were asked (1) whether they would use a psychological Web-based intervention and which preconditions (maximum time, structure, participate alone or with their partner) it should meet; (2) which functionalities (information, peer support, online psychological counseling) the intervention should contain; and (3) which topics (eg, taking care of oneself) should be addressed. Data were coded by 2 coders independently. RESULTS: The need for a Web-based intervention varied. Arguments for being interested in a Web-based intervention included the need for acknowledgement; the need for someone they could talk to; and the need for information, tips, and support. Based on their experiences as a partner of a cancer patient, participants would prefer an intervention that is not too time-consuming (about 1-2 hours a week) and which is based on a "step-by-step" approach, meaning that the content of the intervention should match the stage of their partner's disease. Also, they would prefer a positive approach, which means that the intervention should be a source of hope and energy. Most participants stated that they would prefer to participate without their ill spouse, because they do not want to burden their partners with their own problems. An intervention should contain information and optional peer support. Participants' opinions about online psychological counseling in the intervention were divided. Arguments for online psychological counseling were that a professional could check on them and they were able to ask questions. Arguments against online counseling were that partners were not in need for guidance or they had enough support from usual care. Topics with the highest priority were "coping with feelings and emotions," "should I or shouldn't I spare my partner?," "communicating with each other," "asking for help and refusing help," and "moving on with life after cancer treatment." Furthermore, participants suggested additional topics of "dare to enjoy" and "acceptance of the patient's disease." CONCLUSIONS: A Web-based intervention can be a valuable addition to existing support initiatives for partners of cancer patients. This study provides important information about the content and form of such an intervention. Flexibility and a positive approach seem to be the most important features.