Search

Background: Mobile health applications can offer tailored self-management support to individuals living with chronic health conditions. However, there are several challenges to the adoption of these technologies in practice. Co-design is a promising approach to overcoming some of these challenges by enabling the development of solutions that meet the actual needs and preferences of the relevant stakeholder groups., Objective: Taking spinal cord injury as a case in point, the overall objectives of this study were to identify the perceived benefits of a co-designed self-management app that could promote its uptake and to explore the factors that may impede adoption., Methods: We adopted a qualitative research approach guided by the Technology Acceptance Model. Data were collected through semistructured interviews with individuals with spinal cord injury (n=15) and two focus groups with health care professionals specialized in spinal cord injury (n=7, n=5). Prior to the interviews and focus groups, study participants were given time to explore the app prototype. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis., Results: Findings of our analysis indicate that study participants perceived the app prototype as potentially useful for supporting individuals with spinal cord injury in preventing pressure injuries. In particular, we identified three concrete use cases highlighting the benefits of the app for different audiences: (1) a companion for newly injured individuals, (2) an emergency kit and motivational support, and 3) a guide for informal caregivers and family members. We also uncovered several challenges that might impede the adoption of the self-management app in practice, including (1) challenges in motivating individuals to use the app, (2) concerns about the misuse and abuse of the app, and (3) organizational and maintenance challenges., Conclusions: This study adds to a growing body of research that investigates individuals' adoption and nonadoption behavior regarding mobile health solutions. Building on earlier work, we make recommendations on how to address the barriers to the adoption of mobile health solutions identified by this study. In particular, there is a need to foster trust in mobile health among prospective users, including both patients and health care professionals. Moreover, increasing personal relevance of mobile health solutions through personalization may be a promising approach to promote uptake. Last but not least, organizational support also plays an instrumental role in mobile health adoption. We conclude that even though co-design is promoted as a promising approach to develop self-management tools, co-design does not guarantee adoption. More research is needed to identify the most promising strategies to promote the adoption of evidence-based mobile health solutions in practice., (©Julia Amann, Maddalena Fiordelli, Anke Scheel-Sailer, Mirjam Brach, Sara Rubinelli. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 09.12.2020.)

Background: Spinal cord injury is a complex chronic health condition that requires individuals to actively self-manage. Therefore, an evidence-based, self-management app would be of value to support individuals with spinal cord injury in the prevention of pressure injuries., Objective: The main objectives of this study were to (1) establish a co-design approach for developing a high-fidelity prototype app for the self-management of individuals with spinal cord injury, (2) design the prototype that resulted from this process, and (3) conduct the first usability assessment of the prototype app., Methods: We adopted a co-design approach to develop an evidence-based app prototype. Starting from a preliminary content model (based on clinical guidelines for the prevention of pressure injuries) and three research-based user personas, we conducted an ideation workshop involving individuals with spinal cord injury and health care professionals. The ideation workshop formed the basis for two consecutive design sprints. The result of this co-design phase was an interactive app prototype. The prototype was evaluated in two rounds of usability testing (N=4 and N=15, respectively) using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods., Results: The co-design process resulted in a high-fidelity prototype with two key components: a self-management component and a communication component. The final prototype included a combination of features to support individuals with spinal cord injury in the prevention of pressure injuries, namely a smart camera, pressure injury diary, expert consultation, reminders, and knowledge repository. Findings of the usability testing showed that most participants navigated the app fluently with little back and forth navigation and were able to successfully complete a set of assigned tasks. These positive results are supported by the average system usability score achieved (78.5/100; range 47.5-95.0) and our qualitative analysis of the semistructured interviews. Despite an overall positive evaluation of the app prototype, we identified areas for improvement (eg, inclusion of a search function)., Conclusions: Individuals with spinal cord injury often need to navigate competing interests and priorities, paired with uncertainty about the accuracy and relevance of clinical recommendations. Understanding what matters to individuals with spinal cord injury can help guide the design of behavioral interventions that are useful and acceptable to these individuals in their daily lives. This study shows that involving individuals with spinal cord injury and health care professionals in co-designing a self-management app can foster knowledge cocreation at the intersection of lived experience, medical expertise, and technical solutions., (©Julia Amann, Maddalena Fiordelli, Mirjam Brach, Sue Bertschy, Anke Scheel-Sailer, Sara Rubinelli. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 09.07.2020.)

Background: Technological solutions, particularly mobile health (mHealth), have been shown to be potentially viable approaches for sustaining individuals' self-management of chronic health conditions. Theory-based interventions are more successful, as evidence-based information is an essential prerequisite for appropriate self-management. However, several reviews have shown that many existing mobile apps fail to be either theoretically grounded or based on evidence. Although some authors have attempted to address these two issues by focusing on the design and development processes of apps, concrete efforts to systematically select evidence-based content are scant., Objective: The objective of this study was to present a procedure for the participatory identification of evidence-based content to ground the development of a self-management app., Methods: To illustrate the procedure, we focused on the prevention and management of pressure injuries (PIs) in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). The procedure involves the following three steps: (1) identification of existing evidence through review and synthesis of existing recommendations on the prevention and self-management of PIs in SCI; (2) a consensus meeting with experts from the field of SCI and individuals with SCI to select the recommendations that are relevant and applicable to community-dwelling individuals in their daily lives; and (3) consolidation of the results of the study., Results: In this case study, at the end of the three-step procedure, the content for an mHealth intervention was selected in the form of 98 recommendations., Conclusions: This study describes a procedure for the participatory identification and selection of disease-specific evidence and professional best practices to inform self-management interventions. This procedure might be especially useful in cases of complex chronic health conditions, as every recommendation in these cases needs to be evaluated and considered in light of all other self-management requirements. Hence, the agreement of experts and affected individuals is essential to ensure the selection of evidence-based content that is considered to be relevant and applicable., (©Maddalena Fiordelli, Claudia Zanini, Julia Amann, Anke Scheel-Sailer, Mirjam Brach, Gerold Stucki, Sara Rubinelli. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 20.05.2020.)

Background: There is mixed evidence on the effectiveness of vaccination-related interventions. A major limitation of most intervention studies is that they do not apply randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the method that, over the last 2 decades, has increasingly been considered as the only method to provide proof of the effectiveness of an intervention and, consequently, as the most important instrument in deciding whether to adopt an intervention or not. This study, however, holds that methods other than RCTs also can produce meaningful results., Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate 2 mobile phone-based interventions aimed at increasing parents' knowledge of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination (through elements of gamification) and their psychological empowerment (through the use of narratives), respectively. The 2 interventions were part of an RCT., Methods: We conducted 2 studies with the RCT participants: a Web-based survey aimed at assessing their rating of the tool regarding a number of qualities such as usability and usefulness (N=140), and qualitative telephonic interviews to explore participants' experiences with the app (N=60)., Results: The results of the survey showed that participants receiving the knowledge intervention (alone or together with the empowerment intervention) liked the app significantly better compared with the group that only received the empowerment intervention (F 2,137 =15.335; P<.001). Parents who were exposed to the empowerment intervention complained that they did not receive useful information but were only invited to make an informed, autonomous MMR vaccination decision., Conclusions: The results suggest that efforts to empower patients should always be accompanied by the provision of factual information. Using a narrative format that promotes parents' identification can be an appropriate strategy, but it should be employed together with the presentation of more points of views and notions regarding, for instance, the risks and benefits of the vaccination at the same time., Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number 30768813; http://www.isrctn.com/ ISRCTN30768813 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xOQSJ3w8)., (©Marta Fadda, Elisa Galimberti, Maddalena Fiordelli, Peter Johannes Schulz. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 07.03.2018.)