Preferences of Patients With Musculoskeletal Disorders Regarding the Timing and Channel of eHealth and Factors Influencing Its Use: Mixed Methods Study.
COM-B
Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behavior Model
arthritis
chronic diseases
chronic illness
citizen
citizen science
civic
digital hospital services
eHealth
focus group
health tech
kinesio
multiple methods
musculoskeletal
musculoskeletal disorders
orthopedic
perspectives
physio
preferences
rehabilitation
rheuma
rheumatoid arthritis
semistructured interview
society
telehealth
telemedicine
thematic analysis
Journal
JMIR human factors
ISSN: 2292-9495
Titre abrégé: JMIR Hum Factors
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101666561
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 09 2023
27 09 2023
Historique:
received:
07
12
2022
accepted:
22
07
2023
revised:
22
06
2023
medline:
28
9
2023
pubmed:
27
9
2023
entrez:
27
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Implementation of eHealth is progressing slowly. In-depth insight into patients' preferences and needs regarding eHealth might improve its use. This study aimed to describe when patients want to use eHealth, how patients want to communicate and receive information digitally, and what factors influence the use of eHealth in clinical practice. A multimethod study was conducted. Two meetings of ~5.5 hours with plenary information sessions and focus groups were held with 22 patients from the rheumatology, orthopedics, and rehabilitation departments of a Dutch hospital specialized in musculoskeletal disorders. Assignments were performed during the focus groups in which qualitative (eg, semistructured interview questions) and quantitative (ie, voting and ranking factors) data were collected. The way patients want to use eHealth varies between patients and moments of a patient's care pathway. Patients' digital channel preferences depended on the need for interaction with a health care provider (HCP). The interaction need is in turn influenced by the degree to which information or communication is specific to an individual patient and leads to consequences for the patient. The 5 most important factors influencing the use of eHealth were access to medical information (eg, electronic health records), perceived control over disease management, correctness and completeness of information, data security, and access to information or an HCP at any time. The 5 least important factors influencing eHealth use were help with using digital devices, having internet or equipment, digital skills, attitude or emotions toward eHealth, and societal benefits. Patients identified opportunities for using eHealth during all moments of their care pathway. However, preferences for eHealth varied between patients and phases in the care pathway. As a consequence, eHealth should be tailored to fit individual patients' preferences but also the need for interaction regarding different topics by offering a variety of digital channels with a gradient of interaction possibilities. Furthermore, digital skills and access to the internet might become less important to focus on in the future. Improving eHealth use by patients may be achieved by providing patients access to correct and safe (medical) information and more control over their care.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Implementation of eHealth is progressing slowly. In-depth insight into patients' preferences and needs regarding eHealth might improve its use.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to describe when patients want to use eHealth, how patients want to communicate and receive information digitally, and what factors influence the use of eHealth in clinical practice.
METHODS
A multimethod study was conducted. Two meetings of ~5.5 hours with plenary information sessions and focus groups were held with 22 patients from the rheumatology, orthopedics, and rehabilitation departments of a Dutch hospital specialized in musculoskeletal disorders. Assignments were performed during the focus groups in which qualitative (eg, semistructured interview questions) and quantitative (ie, voting and ranking factors) data were collected.
RESULTS
The way patients want to use eHealth varies between patients and moments of a patient's care pathway. Patients' digital channel preferences depended on the need for interaction with a health care provider (HCP). The interaction need is in turn influenced by the degree to which information or communication is specific to an individual patient and leads to consequences for the patient. The 5 most important factors influencing the use of eHealth were access to medical information (eg, electronic health records), perceived control over disease management, correctness and completeness of information, data security, and access to information or an HCP at any time. The 5 least important factors influencing eHealth use were help with using digital devices, having internet or equipment, digital skills, attitude or emotions toward eHealth, and societal benefits.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients identified opportunities for using eHealth during all moments of their care pathway. However, preferences for eHealth varied between patients and phases in the care pathway. As a consequence, eHealth should be tailored to fit individual patients' preferences but also the need for interaction regarding different topics by offering a variety of digital channels with a gradient of interaction possibilities. Furthermore, digital skills and access to the internet might become less important to focus on in the future. Improving eHealth use by patients may be achieved by providing patients access to correct and safe (medical) information and more control over their care.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37756049
pii: v10i1e44885
doi: 10.2196/44885
pmc: PMC10568401
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e44885Informations de copyright
©Jeffrey van der Ven, Bart J F van den Bemt, Liset van Dijk, Merel Opdam, Lex L Haegens, Johanna E Vriezekolk, Lise M Verhoef. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (https://humanfactors.jmir.org), 27.09.2023.
Références
Front Psychol. 2016 Jan 08;6:2013
pubmed: 26779108
Disabil Health J. 2020 Oct;13(4):100921
pubmed: 32335066
J Rheumatol. 1990 Dec;17(12):1620-2
pubmed: 2084234
Cureus. 2020 Jul 15;12(7):e9216
pubmed: 32821567
Br Med Bull. 2019 Jun 19;130(1):25-37
pubmed: 31086957
Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 23;6:42
pubmed: 21513547
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Feb 21;16(4):
pubmed: 30795623
Patient. 2011;4(1):1-10
pubmed: 21766889
Inform Health Soc Care. 2021 Dec 2;46(4):412-424
pubmed: 33847218
Yearb Med Inform. 2016 Nov 10;(1):113-119
pubmed: 27830238
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Aug 05;15:309
pubmed: 26242863
Health Lit Res Pract. 2019 Apr 10;3(2):e91-e102
pubmed: 31294310
Telemed J E Health. 2015 Feb;21(2):81-5
pubmed: 25474190
Soc Sci Med. 2022 Jan;292:114523
pubmed: 34785096
JMIR Res Protoc. 2014 Nov 06;3(4):e59
pubmed: 25379679
Implement Sci. 2016 Oct 26;11(1):146
pubmed: 27782832
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Apr 16;16(4):e110
pubmed: 24739471
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 May;65(5):703-11
pubmed: 23203864
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Mar 04;18(3):e50
pubmed: 26944212
PLoS Med. 2009 Aug;6(8):e1000126
pubmed: 19688038
J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 01;20(5):e10235
pubmed: 29716883
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Sep 05;19(9):e300
pubmed: 28874336
BMC Fam Pract. 2021 Feb 7;22(1):33
pubmed: 33550988
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014;205:875-9
pubmed: 25160313
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Dec 03;12:441
pubmed: 23206601
Annu Rev Public Health. 2021 Apr 1;42:463-481
pubmed: 33798406
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Nov 22;21(11):e14197
pubmed: 31755869
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Apr 28;24(4):e36463
pubmed: 35482390
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1204-1222
pubmed: 33069326