RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mobile health applications are increasingly used to support the delivery of health care services to a variety of patients. Based on data obtained from a pragmatic trial of the electronic Patient Reported Outcome (ePRO) app designed to support goal-oriented care primary care, this study aims to (1) examine how patient-reported usability changed over the one-year intervention period, and (2) explore participant attrition rate of the electronic Patient Reported Outcome app over one year study period. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of 44 older adults with complex chronic needs enrolled in the electronic Patient Reported Outcome-digital health intervention. App usage and attrition were measured using device-generated usage logs; usability was measured using the patient-reported post-study system usability questionnaire collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Research memos were used to interpret potential contextual contributing factors to patients' overall usage and usability score pattern. A data triangulation method of both quantitative and qualitative data was used to analyze and interpret study findings. RESULTS: While there was gradual attrition in the use of the ePRO app, patients' usability scores remained consistent throughout the study period. Qualitative memos suggested patients' encounters with technical difficulties and relationship dynamics with primary providers influenced patients' adherence to the ePRO app. CONCLUSION: This study highlights that the patient-provider relationship is a key determining factor that influences complex patients' continued engagement with a Mobile health app. The finding calls attention to the measurement of usability of a Mobile health app, its impact on attrition, and contributing factors that influence patients' attrition. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identified NCT02917954.
RESUMO
CONTEXT: Opioid related deaths are at epidemic levels in many developed nations globally. Concerns about the contribution of prescribed opioids, and particularly high-dose opioids, continue to mount as do initiatives to reduce prescribing. Evidence around opioid tapering, which can be challenging and potentially hazardous, is not well developed. A recent national guideline has recognized this and recommended referral to multidisciplinary care for challenging cases of opioid tapering. However, multidisciplinary care for opioid tapering is not well understood or defined. OBJECTIVE: Identify the existing literature on any multidisciplinary care programs that evaluate impact on opioid use, synthesize how these programs work and clarify whom they benefit. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic rapid realist review. DATASET: Bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library), grey literature, reference hand search and formal expert consultation. RESULTS: 95 studies were identified. 75% of the programs were from the United States and the majority (n = 62) were published after 2000. A minority (n = 23) of programs reported on >12 month opioid use outcomes. There were three necessary but insufficient mechanisms common to all programs: pain relief, behavior change and active medication management. Programs that did not include a combination of all three mechanisms did not result in opioid dose reductions. A concerning 20-40% of subjects resumed opioid use within one year of program completion. CONCLUSIONS: Providing alternative analgesia is insufficient for reducing opioid doses. Even high quality primary care multidisciplinary care programs do not reduce prescribed opioid use unless there is active medication management accomplished by changing the primary opioid prescriber. Rates of return to use of opioids from these programs are very concerning in the current context of a highly potent and lethal street drug supply. This contextual factor may be powerful enough to undermine the modest benefits of opioid dose reduction via multidisciplinary care.
