mHealth for Schizophrenia: Patient Engagement With a Mobile Phone Intervention Following Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: mHealth interventions that use mobile phones as instruments for illness management are gaining popularity. Research examining mobile phone‒based mHealth programs for people with psychosis has shown that these approaches are feasible, acceptable, and clinically promising. However, most mHealth initiatives involving people with schizophrenia have spanned periods ranging from a few days to several weeks and have typically involved participants who were clinically stable. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the viability of extended mHealth interventions for people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders following hospital discharge. Specifically, we set out to examine the following: (1) Can individuals be engaged with a mobile phone intervention program during this high-risk period?, (2) Are age, gender, racial background, or hospitalization history associated with their engagement or persistence in using a mobile phone intervention over time?, and (3) Does engagement differ by characteristics of the mHealth intervention itself (ie, pre-programmed vs on-demand functions)? METHODS: We examined mHealth intervention use and demographic and clinical predictors of engagement in 342 individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who were given the FOCUS mobile phone intervention as part of a technology-assisted relapse prevention program during the 6-month high-risk period following hospitalization. RESULTS: On average, participants engaged with FOCUS for 82% of the weeks they had the mobile phone. People who used FOCUS more often continued using it over longer periods: 44% used the intervention over 5-6 months, on average 4.3 days a week. Gender, race, age, and number of past psychiatric hospitalizations were associated with engagement. Females used FOCUS on average 0.4 more days a week than males. White participants engaged on average 0.7 days more a week than African-Americans and responded to prompts on 0.7 days more a week than Hispanic participants. Younger participants (age 18-29) had 0.4 fewer days of on-demand use a week than individuals who were 30-45 years old and 0.5 fewer days a week than older participants (age 46-60). Participants with fewer past hospitalizations (1-6) engaged on average 0.2 more days a week than those with seven or more. mHealth program functions were associated with engagement. Participants responded to prompts more often than they self-initiated on-demand tools, but both FOCUS functions were used regularly. Both types of intervention use declined over time (on-demand use had a steeper decline). Although mHealth use declined, the majority of individuals used both on-demand and system-prompted functions regularly throughout their participation. Therefore, neither function is extraneous. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrated that individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders can actively engage with a clinically supported mobile phone intervention for up to 6 months following hospital discharge. mHealth may be useful in reaching a clinical population that is typically difficult to engage during high-risk periods.

Affective forecasting in schizophrenia: comparing predictions to real-time Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) ratings.

OBJECTIVE: "Affective forecasting" refers to the predictions people make about future affective experiences. These predictions influence decision making, which in turn might impact individuals' level of functioning, goal-directed behavior, and pursuit of potentially rewarding activities. In the current study, we explored affective forecasting in people diagnosed with schizophrenia. METHOD: Twenty-four participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were asked to provide affective forecasts for an upcoming week. They were subsequently given a handheld mobile device that prompted them to complete "in-the-moment" positive affect (i.e., feeling active, excited, interested) and negative affect (i.e., jittery, scared, hostile, upset, guilty) ratings 6 times daily, over the next 7 days. Paired-sample t tests were used to compare forecasts to average weekly momentary ratings. RESULTS: Participants expected more emotionally charged weeks than they actually experienced-both positive affect forecasts and negative affect forecasts were more intense than the average weekly ratings. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The findings of the study have implications for psychiatric rehabilitation; outlining the differences between consumer forecasts (e.g., excessively pessimistic predictions, unrealistic expectations) and actual experience can serve as a component of psychosocial interventions, including motivational interviewing, goal setting, thought challenging, and vocational rehabilitation. Mobile technologies can be incorporated for short-term data collection in the context of these rehabilitation efforts.

Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a smartphone intervention for schizophrenia.

The FOCUS smartphone intervention was developed to provide automated real-time/real-place illness management support to individuals with schizophrenia. The system was specifically designed to be usable by people with psychotic disorders who may have cognitive impairment, psychotic symptoms, negative symptoms, and/or low reading levels. FOCUS offers users both prescheduled and on-demand resources to facilitate symptom management, mood regulation, medication adherence, social functioning, and improved sleep. In this study, 33 individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder used FOCUS over a 1-month period in their own environments. Participants were able to learn how to use the intervention independently, and all but one participant completed the trial successfully and returned the smartphones intact. Completers used the system on 86.5% of days they had the device, an average of 5.2 times a day. Approximately 62% of use of the FOCUS intervention was initiated by the participants, and 38% of use was in response to automated prompts. Baseline levels of cognitive functioning, negative symptoms, persecutory ideation, and reading level were not related to participants' use of the intervention. Approximately 90% of participants rated the intervention as highly acceptable and usable. Paired samples t tests found significant reductions in psychotic symptoms, depression, and general psychopathology, after 1 month of FOCUS use. This study demonstrated the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of the FOCUS intervention for schizophrenia and introduces a new treatment model which has promise for extending the reach of evidence-based care beyond the confines of a physical clinic using widely available technologies.

Development and usability testing of FOCUS: a smartphone system for self-management of schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Mobile Health (mHealth) approaches can support the rehabilitation of individuals with psychiatric conditions. In the current article, we describe the development of a smartphone illness self-management system for people with schizophrenia. METHODS: The research was conducted with consumers and practitioners at a community-based rehabilitation agency. Stage 1: 904 individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder completed a survey reporting on their current use of mobile devices and interest in mHealth services. Eight practitioners completed a survey examining their attitudes and expectations from an mHealth intervention, and identified needs and potential obstacles. Stage 2: A multidisciplinary team incorporated consumer and practitioner input and employed design principles for the development of e-resources for people with schizophrenia to produce an mHealth intervention. Stage 3: 12 consumers participated in laboratory usability sessions. They performed tasks involved in operating the new system, and provided "think aloud" commentary and post-session usability ratings. RESULTS: 570 (63%) of survey respondents reported owning a mobile device and many expressed interest in receiving mHealth services. Most practitioners believed that consumers could learn to use and would benefit from an mHealth intervention. In response, we developed a smartphone system that targets medication adherence, mood regulation, sleep, social functioning, and coping with symptoms. Usability testing revealed several design vulnerabilities, and the system was adapted to address consumer needs and preferences accordingly. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Through a comprehensive development process, we produced an mHealth illness self-management intervention that is likely to be used successfully, and is ready for deployment and systemic evaluation in real-world conditions.

Engagement of groups in family medicine board maintenance of certification.

PURPOSE: The American Board of Medical Specialties' Performance in Practice ("Part IV") portion of Maintenance of Certification (MOC) requirement provides an opportunity for practicing physicians to demonstrate quality improvement (QI) competence. However, specialty boards' certification of one physician at a time does not tap into the potential of collective effort. This article shares learning from a project to help family physicians work in groups to meet their Part IV MOC requirement. METHODS: A year-long implementation and evaluation project was conducted. Initially, 348 members of a regional family physician organization were invited to participate. A second path was established through 3 health care systems and a county-wide learning collaborative. Participants were offered (1) a basic introduction to QI methods, (2) the option of an alternative Part IV MOC module using a patient experience survey to guide QI efforts, (3) practice-level improvement coaching, (4) support for collaboration and co-learning, and (5) provision of QI resources. RESULTS: More physicians participated through group (66) than individual (12) recruitment, for a total of 78 physicians in 20 practices. Participation occurred at 3 levels: individual, intrapractice, and interpractice. Within the 1-year time frame, intrapractice collaboration occurred most frequently. Interpractice and system-level collaboration has begun and continues to evolve. Physicians felt that they benefited from access to a practice coach and group process. CONCLUSIONS: Practice-level collaboration, access to a practice coach, flexibility in choosing and focusing improvement projects, tailored support, and involvement with professional affiliations can enhance the Part IV MOC process. Specialty boards are likely to discover productive opportunities from working with practices, professional organizations, and health care systems to support intra- and interpractice collaborative QI work that uses Part IV MOC requirements to motivate practice improvement.