Patients' Measurement Priorities for Remote Measurement Technologies to Aid Chronic Health Conditions: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Remote measurement technology (RMT), including the use of mobile phone apps and wearable devices, may provide the opportunity for real-world assessment and intervention that will streamline clinical input for years to come. In order to establish the benefits of this approach, we need to operationalize what is expected in terms of a successful measurement. We focused on three clinical long-term conditions where a novel case has been made for the benefits of RMT: major depressive disorder (MDD), multiple sclerosis (MS), and epilepsy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a consultation exercise on the clinical end point or outcome measurement priorities for RMT studies, drawing on the experiences of people with chronic health conditions. METHODS: A total of 24 participants (16/24 women, 67%), ranging from 28 to 65 years of age, with a diagnosis of one of three chronic health conditions-MDD, MS, or epilepsy-took part in six focus groups. A systematic thematic analysis was used to extract themes and subthemes of clinical end point or measurement priorities. RESULTS: The views of people with MDD, epilepsy, and MS differed. Each group highlighted unique measurements of importance, relevant to their specific needs. Although there was agreement that remote measurement could be useful for tracking symptoms of illness, some symptoms were specific to the individual groups. Measuring signs of wellness was discussed more by people with MDD than by people with MS and epilepsy. However, overlap did emerge when considering contextual factors, such as life events and availability of support (MDD and epilepsy) as well as ways of coping (epilepsy and MS). CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique study that puts patients' views at the forefront of the design of a clinical study employing novel digital resources. In all cases, measuring symptom severity is key; people want to know when their health is getting worse. Second, symptom severity needs to be placed into context. A holistic approach that, in some cases, considers signs of wellness as well as illness, should be the aim of studies employing RMT to understand the health of people with chronic conditions.

Patient perspectives on the acceptability of mHealth technology for remote measurement and management of epilepsy: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Innovative uses of mobile health (mHealth) technology for real-time measurement and management of epilepsy may improve the care provided to patients. For instance, seizure detection and quantifying related problems will have an impact on quality of life and improve clinical management for people experiencing frequent and uncontrolled seizures. Engaging patients with mHealth technology is essential, but little is known about patient perspectives on their acceptability. The aim of this study was to conduct an in-depth qualitative analysis of what people with uncontrolled epilepsy think could be the potential uses of mHealth technology and to identify early potential barriers and facilitators to engagement in three European countries. METHOD: Twenty people currently experiencing epileptic seizures took part in five focus groups held across the UK, Italy, and Spain. Participants all completed written consent and a demographic questionnaire prior to the focus group commencing, and each group discussion lasted 60-120 min. A coding frame, developed from a systematic review of the previous literature, was used to structure a thematic analysis. We extracted themes and subthemes from the discussions, focusing first on possible uses of mHealth and then the barriers and facilitators to engagement. RESULTS: Participants were interested in mHealth technology as a clinical detection tool, e.g., to aid communication about seizure occurrence with their doctors. Other suggested uses included being able to predict or prevent seizures, and to improve self-management. Key facilitators to engagement were the ability to raise awareness, plan activities better, and improve safety. Key barriers were the potential for increased stigma and anxiety. Using familiar and customizable products could be important moderators of engagement. CONCLUSION: People with uncontrolled epilepsy think that there is a scope for mHealth technology to be useful in healthcare as a detection or prediction tool. The costs will be compared with the benefits when it comes to engagement, and ongoing work with patients and other stakeholders is needed to design practical resources.

Engaging across dimensions of diversity: A cross-national perspective on mHealth tools for managing relapsing remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Smartphone apps and wearable devices could augment clinical practice by detecting changes in health status for multiple sclerosis (MS). This study sought to investigate potential barriers and facilitators for uptake and sustained use in (i) people with both relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) and progressive MS (PMS) and (ii) across different countries. METHODS: Twenty four participants with MS took part in four focus groups held in three countries (2 in the UK, 1 in Spain, and 1 in Italy) to investigate potential barriers and facilitators for mHealth technology. A systematic thematic analysis was used to extract themes and sub-themes. RESULTS: Facilitators and barriers were organised into functional technology-related factors and non-functional health-related and user-related factors. Twelve themes captured all requirements across the three countries for both RRMS and PMS. Key requirements included accommodation for varying physical abilities, providing information and memory aids. Potential negative effects on mood and providing choice and control as part of overcoming practical challenges were identified. CONCLUSIONS: We took a cross-national perspective and found many similarities between three European countries across people with RRMS and PMS. Future provision should accommodate the key requirements identified to engage people with MS in scalable mHealth interventions.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Engagement With mHealth Technology for Remote Measurement and Management of Depression: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mobile technology has the potential to provide accurate, impactful data on the symptoms of depression, which could improve health management or assist in early detection of relapse. However, for this potential to be achieved, it is essential that patients engage with the technology. Although many barriers to and facilitators of the use of this technology are common across therapeutic areas and technology types, many may be specific to cultural and health contexts. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the potential barriers to and facilitators of engagement with mobile health (mHealth) technology for remote measurement and management of depression across three Western European countries. METHODS: Participants (N=25; 4:1 ratio of women to men; age range, 25-73 years) who experienced depression participated in five focus groups held in three countries (two in the United Kingdom, two in Spain, and one in Italy). The focus groups investigated the potential barriers to and facilitators of the use of mHealth technology. A systematic thematic analysis was used to extract themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Facilitators and barriers were categorized as health-related factors, user-related factors, and technology-related factors. A total of 58 subthemes of specific barriers and facilitators or moderators emerged. A core group of themes including motivation, potential impact on mood and anxiety, aspects of inconvenience, and ease of use was noted across all countries. CONCLUSIONS: Similarities in the barriers to and facilitators of the use of mHealth technology have been observed across Spain, Italy, and the United Kingdom. These themes provide guidance on ways to promote the design of feasible and acceptable cross-cultural mHealth tools.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Engagement With Remote Measurement Technology for Managing Health: Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Findings.

BACKGROUND: Remote measurement technology refers to the use of mobile health technology to track and measure change in health status in real time as part of a person's everyday life. With accurate measurement, remote measurement technology offers the opportunity to augment health care by providing personalized, precise, and preemptive interventions that support insight into patterns of health-related behavior and self-management. However, for successful implementation, users need to be engaged in its use. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to systematically review the literature to update and extend the understanding of the key barriers to and facilitators of engagement with and use of remote measurement technology, to guide the development of future remote measurement technology resources. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines involving original studies dating back to the last systematic review published in 2014. We included studies if they met the following entry criteria: population (people using remote measurement technology approaches to aid management of health), intervention (remote measurement technology system), comparison group (no comparison group specified), outcomes (qualitative or quantitative evaluation of the barriers to and facilitators of engagement with this system), and study design (randomized controlled trials, feasibility studies, and observational studies). We searched 5 databases (MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) for articles published from January 2014 to May 2017. Articles were independently screened by 2 researchers. We extracted study characteristics and conducted a content analysis to define emerging themes to synthesize findings. Formal quality assessments were performed to address risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria, employing quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods designs. Studies were conducted in 10 countries, included male and female participants, with ages ranging from 8 to 95 years, and included both active and passive remote monitoring systems for a diverse range of physical and mental health conditions. However, they were relatively short and had small sample sizes, and reporting of usage statistics was inconsistent. Acceptability of remote measurement technology according to the average percentage of time used (64%-86.5%) and dropout rates (0%-44%) was variable. The barriers and facilitators from the content analysis related to health status, perceived utility and value, motivation, convenience and accessibility, and usability. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review highlight gaps in the design of studies trialing remote measurement technology, including the use of quantitative assessment of usage and acceptability. Several processes that could facilitate engagement with this technology have been identified and may drive the development of more person-focused remote measurement technology. However, these factors need further testing through carefully designed experimental studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42017060644; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=60644 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/70K4mThTr).