Patients' Measurement Priorities for Remote Measurement Technologies to Aid Chronic Health Conditions: Qualitative Analysis.
mHealth
patient involvement
qualitative analysis
remote measurement technology
Journal
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
ISSN: 2291-5222
Titre abrégé: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101624439
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 06 2020
10 06 2020
Historique:
received:
26
06
2019
accepted:
15
12
2019
revised:
31
10
2019
entrez:
11
6
2020
pubmed:
11
6
2020
medline:
28
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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). 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.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32519975
pii: v8i6e15086
doi: 10.2196/15086
pmc: PMC7315360
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e15086Informations de copyright
©Sara Simblett, Faith Matcham, Hannah Curtis, Ben Greer, Ashley Polhemus, Jan Novák, Jose Ferrao, Peter Gamble, Matthew Hotopf, Vaibhav Narayan, Til Wykes, Remote Assessment Of Disease And Relapse – Central Nervous System (RADAR-CNS) Consortium. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 10.06.2020.
Références
Neurology. 2013 Feb 5;80(6):590-9
pubmed: 23175727
Am J Psychiatry. 1999 Jul;156(7):1000-6
pubmed: 10401442
Health Expect. 2012 Dec;15(4):389-400
pubmed: 21615638
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1994 Jul;29(4):165-71
pubmed: 7939965
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jul 12;20(7):e10480
pubmed: 30001997
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Oct;5(10):845-854
pubmed: 30170964
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Nov 27;5:63
pubmed: 18042300
BMC Med. 2016 Nov 7;14(1):176
pubmed: 27817747
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2017 Nov;88(11):999-1001
pubmed: 28572278
J Affect Disord. 2018 Nov;240:121-129
pubmed: 30064077
Epilepsy Behav. 2018 Feb;79:1-3
pubmed: 29223931
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Jan 30;7(1):e11325
pubmed: 30698535
Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019 Jul;32:123-132
pubmed: 31125754
J Neurol Sci. 2017 Jan 15;372:331-341
pubmed: 28017241
J Affect Disord. 1997 Dec;46(3):219-31
pubmed: 9547118
PLoS Med. 2016 Feb 02;13(2):e1001953
pubmed: 26836780
Disabil Rehabil. 2013;35(22):1885-95
pubmed: 23384240
J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13
pubmed: 11556941
Epilepsy Behav. 2019 Aug;97:123-129
pubmed: 31247523
Seizure. 1998 Jun;7(3):201-5
pubmed: 9700832