Feedback and Financial Incentives for Reducing Cell Phone Use While Driving: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Handheld phone use while driving is a major factor in vehicle crashes. Scalable interventions are needed to encourage drivers not to use their phones. Objective: To test whether interventions involving social comparison feedback and/or financial incentives can reduce drivers' handheld phone use. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a randomized clinical trial, interventions were administered nationwide in the US via a mobile application in the context of a usage-based insurance program (Snapshot Mobile application). Customers were eligible to be invited to participate in the study if enrolled in the usage-based insurance program for 30 to 70 days. The study was conducted from May 13 to June 30, 2019. Analysis was completed December 22, 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 trial arms for a 7-week intervention period: (1) control; (2) feedback, with weekly push notification about their handheld phone use compared with that of similar others; (3) standard incentive, with a maximum $50 award at the end of the intervention based on how their handheld phone use compared with similar others; (4) standard incentive plus feedback, combining interventions of arms 2 and 3; (5) reframed incentive plus feedback, with a maximum $7.15 award each week, framed as participant's to lose; and (6) doubled reframed incentive plus feedback, a maximum $14.29 weekly loss-framed award. Main Outcome and Measure: Proportion of drive time engaged in handheld phone use in seconds per hour (s/h) of driving. Analyses were conducted with the intention-to-treat approach. Results: Of 17 663 customers invited by email to participate, 2109 opted in and were randomized. A total of 2020 drivers finished the intervention period (68.0% female; median age, 30 [IQR, 25-39] years). Median baseline handheld phone use was 216 (IQR, 72-480) s/h. Relative to control, feedback and standard incentive participants did not reduce their handheld phone use. Standard incentive plus feedback participants reduced their use by -38 (95% CI, -69 to -8) s/h (P = .045); reframed incentive plus feedback participants reduced their use by -56 (95% CI, -87 to -26) s/h (P < .001); and doubled reframed incentive plus feedback participants reduced their use by -42 s/h (95% CI, -72 to -13 s/h; P = .007). The 5 active treatment arms did not differ significantly from each other. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, providing social comparison feedback plus incentives reduced handheld phone use while individuals were driving. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03833219.

A randomized trial of behavioral interventions yielding sustained reductions in distracted driving.

Distracted driving is responsible for nearly 1 million crashes each year in the United States alone, and a major source of driver distraction is handheld phone use. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of interventions designed to create sustained reductions in handheld use while driving (NCT04587609). Participants were 1,653 consenting Progressive® Snapshot® usage-based auto insurance customers ages 18 to 77 who averaged at least 2 min/h of handheld use while driving in the month prior to study invitation. They were randomly assigned to one of five arms for a 10-wk intervention period. Arm 1 (control) got education about the risks of handheld phone use, as did the other arms. Arm 2 got a free phone mount to facilitate hands-free use. Arm 3 got the mount plus a commitment exercise and tips for hands-free use. Arm 4 got the mount, commitment, and tips plus weekly goal gamification and social competition. Arm 5 was the same as Arm 4, plus offered behaviorally designed financial incentives. Postintervention, participants were monitored until the end of their insurance rating period, 25 to 65 d more. Outcome differences were measured using fractional logistic regression. Arm 4 participants, who received gamification and competition, reduced their handheld use by 20.5% relative to control (P < 0.001); Arm 5 participants, who additionally received financial incentives, reduced their use by 27.6% (P < 0.001). Both groups sustained these reductions through the end of their insurance rating period.

Development of a patient-centered text message-based platform for the self-management of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a patient-centered text message-based platform that promotes self-management of symptoms of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS). METHODS: Adult women with IC/BPS interested in initiating a first- or second-line treatments per American Urological Association guidelines (recategorized as "behavioral/non-pharmacologic treatments" and "oral medicines" in the 2022 version) participated in rapid cycle innovation consisting of iterative cycles of contextual inquiry, prototype design and development. We delivered treatment modules and supportive messages using an algorithm-driven interactive messaging prototype through a HIPAA-compliant texting platform. Patients provided feedback through narrative text messages and an exit interview. Feedback was analyzed qualitatively and used to iteratively revise the platform until engagement ≥ 85% and accuracy ≥ 80% were achieved. The final version consisted of four treatment module categories (patient education and behavioral modification, cognitive behavioral therapy, pelvic floor physical therapy, and guided mindfulness practices) and supportive messages delivered through an automated algorithm over 6 weeks. RESULTS: Thirty IC/BPS patients with moderate symptom bother (median IC Problem Index score 9, range 6-12) participated in five cycles of contextual inquiry. Qualitative analysis identified three overarching concepts that informed the development of the platform: preference for patient centered terms, desire to gain self-efficacy in managing symptoms, and need for provider support. Patients preferred the term "interstitial cystitis" to "bladder pain syndrome" which carried the stigma of chronic pain. Patients reported greater self-efficacy in managing symptoms through improved access to mind-body and behavioral treatment modules that helped them to gain insight into their motivations and behaviors. The concept of provider support was informed by shared decision making (patients could choose preferred treatment modules) and reduced sense of isolation (weekly check in messages to check on symptom bother). CONCLUSION: A patient centered text message-based platform may be clinically useful in the self-management of IC/BPS symptoms.

Telemedicine in Liver Disease and Beyond: Can the COVID-19 Crisis Lead to Action?

Evidence strongly supports that access to specialty gastroenterology or hepatology care in cirrhosis is associated with higher adherence to guideline-recommended care and improves clinical outcomes. Presently, only about one half of acute care hospitalizations for cirrhosis-related complications result in inpatient specialty care, and the current hepatology workforce cannot meet the demand of patients with liver disease nationwide, particularly in less densely populated areas and in community-based practices not affiliated with academic centers. Telemedicine, defined as the delivery of health care services at a distance using electronic means for diagnosis and treatment, holds tremendous promise to increase access to broadly specialty care. The technology is cheap and easy to use, although it is presently limited in scale by interstate licensing restrictions and reimbursement barriers. The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and coronavirus disease 2019 has, in the short term, accelerated the growth of telemedicine delivery as a public health and social distancing measure. Herein, we examine whether this public health crisis can accelerate the national conversation about broader adoption of telemedicine for routine medical care in non-crisis situations, using a case series from our telehepatology program as a pragmatic example.