Barriers to and Facilitators of Engagement With mHealth Technology for Remote Measurement and Management of Depression: Qualitative Analysis.
acceptability
barriers
depression
facilitators
feasibility
mHealth
qualitative
Journal
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
ISSN: 2291-5222
Titre abrégé: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101624439
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 01 2019
30 01 2019
Historique:
received:
20
06
2018
accepted:
03
10
2018
revised:
01
10
2018
entrez:
31
1
2019
pubmed:
31
1
2019
medline:
31
1
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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. 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.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30698535
pii: v7i1e11325
doi: 10.2196/11325
pmc: PMC6372936
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e11325Informations de copyright
©Sara Simblett, Faith Matcham, Sara Siddi, Viola Bulgari, Chiara Barattieri di San Pietro, Jorge Hortas López, José Ferrão, Ashley Polhemus, Josep Maria Haro, Giovanni de Girolamo, Peter Gamble, Hans Eriksson, Matthew Hotopf, Til Wykes, RADAR-CNS Consortium. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 30.01.2019.
Références
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014 May-Jun;36(3):249-54
pubmed: 24636721
J Affect Disord. 2011 Jun;131(1-3):233-42
pubmed: 21247636
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2004 Dec;6(6):430-7
pubmed: 15538991
Neurol Ther. 2013 Mar 13;2(1-2):25-42
pubmed: 26000214
Schizophr Bull. 2014 Nov;40(6):1244-53
pubmed: 24609454
J Affect Disord. 2013 May;147(1-3):225-31
pubmed: 23218899
BMJ Innov. 2016 Jan;2(1):14-21
pubmed: 27019745
JMIR Ment Health. 2016 Jul 27;3(3):e34
pubmed: 27465803
Eur Heart J. 2004 Apr;25(7):611-6
pubmed: 15120057
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016 Mar 23;4(1):e31
pubmed: 27009498
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jul 12;20(7):e10480
pubmed: 30001997
BMC Med. 2016 Nov 7;14(1):176
pubmed: 27817747
J Affect Disord. 2012 Mar;137(1-3):106-12
pubmed: 22240085
Psychiatr Serv. 2004 Dec;55(12):1371-8
pubmed: 15572564
J Abnorm Psychol. 2012 Feb;121(1):51-60
pubmed: 21842963
BMC Public Health. 2014 Mar 24;14:273
pubmed: 24656048
Telemed J E Health. 2015 Mar;21(3):213-6
pubmed: 25536190
Disabil Rehabil. 2003 Jan 21;25(2):57-66
pubmed: 12554380