Dataset Information

Digital health interventions for healthy ageing: a qualitative user evaluation and ethical assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Digital health technologies are being increasingly developed with the aim of allowing older adults to maintain functional independence throughout the old age, a process known as healthy ageing. Such digital health technologies for healthy ageing are expected to mitigate the socio-economic effects of population ageing and improve the quality of life of older people. However, little is known regarding the views and needs of older people regarding these technologies.

Aim

The aim of this study was to explore the views, needs and perceptions of community-dwelling older adults regarding the use of digital health technologies for healthy ageing.

Method

Face-to-face, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with community-dwelling older adults (median age 79.6 years). The interview process involved both abstract reflections and practical demonstrations. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed according to inductive content analysis.

Results

Three main themes and twelve sub-themes addressing our study aim resulted from the data obtained. The main themes revolved around favorable views and perceptions on technology-assisted living, usability evaluations and ethical considerations.

Conclusions

Our study reveals a generally positive attitude towards digital health technologies as participants believed digital tools could positively contribute to improving their overall wellbeing, especially if designed in a patient-centered manner. Safety concerns and ethical issues related to privacy, empowerment and lack of human contact were also addressed by participants as key considerations.

SUBMITTER: Ienca M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8252216 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile many digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been found to be efficacious, patient engagement with DMHIs has increasingly emerged as a concern for implementation in real-world clinical settings. To address engagement, we must first understand what standard engagement levels are in the context of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and how these compare with other treatments.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to examine the state of reporting on intervention engagement in RCTs of mobile app-based interventions intended to treat symptoms of depression. We sought to identify what engagement metrics are and are not routinely reported as well as what the metrics that are reported reflect about standard engagement levels.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of 7 databases to identify studies meeting our eligibility criteria, namely, RCTs that evaluated use of a mobile app-based intervention in adults, for which depressive symptoms were a primary outcome of interest. We then extracted 2 kinds of information from each article: intervention details and indices of DMHI engagement. A 5-element framework of minimum necessary DMHI engagement reporting was derived by our team and guided our data extraction. This framework included (1) recommended app use as communicated to participants at enrollment and, when reported, app adherence criteria; (2) rate of intervention uptake among those assigned to the intervention; (3) level of app use metrics reported, specifically number of uses and time spent using the app; (4) duration of app use metrics (ie, weekly use patterns); and (5) number of intervention completers.ResultsDatabase searching yielded 2083 unique records. Of these, 22 studies were eligible for inclusion. Only 64% (14/22) of studies included in this review specified rate of intervention uptake. Level of use metrics was only reported in 59% (13/22) of the studies reviewed. Approximately one-quarter of the studies (5/22, 23%) reported duration of use metrics. Only half (11/22, 50%) of the studies reported the number of participants who completed the app-based components of the intervention as intended or other metrics related to completion. Findings in those studies reporting metrics related to intervention completion indicated that between 14.4% and 93.0% of participants randomized to a DMHI condition completed the intervention as intended or according to a specified adherence criteria.ConclusionsFindings suggest that engagement was underreported and widely varied. It was not uncommon to see completion rates at or below 50% (11/22) of those participants randomized to a treatment condition or to simply see completion rates not reported at all. This variability in reporting suggests a failure to establish sufficient reporting standards and limits the conclusions that can be drawn about level of engagement with DMHIs. Based on these findings, the 5-element framework applied in this review may be useful as a minimum necessary standard for DMHI engagement reporting.

Project description:BackgroundMedical students show a relatively high prevalence for common mental disorders. Only few of those in need for treatment seek professional help. Therefore, easily accessible interventions are required. While several evidence-based internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) have been proposed, little is known about medical students' attitudes towards using them.ObjectiveWe aimed to explore the views of medical students on IMIs as well as facilitators and barriers to use them and gain first insights into their preferences for tailored IMIs.MethodsWe conducted four focus groups with 26 medical students enrolled at a German medical school in March 2020. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed following established approaches for qualitative content analysis.ResultsMedical students valued IMIs for their low-threshold and flexible access, their potential to bridge waiting times and as a first step towards face-to-face-therapy. However, medical students preferred face-to-face interventions in case of severe mental health problems. The main disadvantages named by students included difficulties to find or decide on suitable IMIs based on clear quality criteria, fear of a misdiagnosis and lack of personalisation and human interaction. Some students also questioned the effectiveness of IMIs. Easy handling, flexible use, data safety and easily understandable terms of use were believed to facilitate the uptake of IMIs, whereas technical problems, frequent notifications, required internet access, need to register, lack of anonymity, high time expenditure and costs were reported to hinder their use. Most students did not prefer IMIs tailored to medical students but rather wanted to use IMIs suitable for students of all disciplines.ConclusionOur results suggest overall positive views regarding IMIs for mental health promotion but concerns regarding their use for severe mental disorders and acute crises. Our findings indicate that IMIs may represent promising tools for stress prevention and early interventions for medical students. Students explicitly stated to prefer quality-approved IMIs recommended and provided by their university.

Project description:BackgroundThe English Global Digital Exemplar (GDE) program is one of the first concerted efforts to create a digital health learning ecosystem across a national health service.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore mechanisms that support or inhibit the exchange of interorganizational digital transformation knowledge.MethodsWe conducted a formative qualitative evaluation of the GDE program. We used semistructured interviews with clinical, technical, and managerial staff; national program managers and network leaders; nonparticipant observations of knowledge transfer activities through attending meetings, workshops, and conferences; and documentary analysis of policy documents. The data were thematically analyzed by drawing on a theory-informed sociotechnical coding framework. We used a mixture of deductive and inductive methods, supported by NVivo software, to facilitate coding.ResultsWe conducted 341 one-on-one and 116 group interviews, observed 86 meetings, and analyzed 245 documents from 36 participating provider organizations. We also conducted 51 high-level interviews with policy makers and vendors; performed 77 observations of national meetings, workshops, and conferences; and analyzed 80 national documents. Formal processes put in place by the GDE program to initiate and reinforce knowledge transfer and learning have accelerated the growth of informal knowledge networking and helped establish the foundations of a learning ecosystem. However, formal networks were most effective when supported by informal networking. The benefits of networking were enhanced (and costs reduced) by geographical proximity, shared culture and context, common technological functionality, regional and strategic alignments, and professional agendas.ConclusionsKnowledge exchange is most effective when sustained through informal networking driven by the mutual benefits of sharing knowledge and convergence between group members in their organizational and technological setting and goals. Policy interventions need to enhance incentives and reduce barriers to sharing across the ecosystem, be flexible in tailoring formal interventions to emerging needs, and promote informal knowledge sharing.

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, exponential growth in digital innovations and internet access has provided opportunities to deliver health services at a much greater scale than previously possible. Evidence-based technology-enabled interventions can provide cost-effective, accessible, and resource-efficient solutions for addressing mental health issues. This study evaluated the first year of a supported digital cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) service provided by the national health service in Ireland, which has been accessible to individuals who receive a referral from one of five referring groups: General Practitioners, Primary Care Psychology, Counselling Primary Care, Community Mental Health, and Jigsaw (a nationwide youth mental health service).MethodsA retrospective, observational study examining data from the service between April 2021 to April 2022 was conducted. Descriptive statistics on referrals, account activations, user demographics, program usage, and user satisfaction were extracted, and pre-to-post clinical outcomes for depression measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and for anxiety measured by the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 were analysed using linear mixed effect models.ResultsThere were 5,298 referrals and 3,236 (61%) account activations within the year. Most users were female (72.9%) and aged between 18 and 44 years (75.4%). The CBT programs were associated with significant reductions in both depression (β = 3.34, 95% CI [3.03, 3.65], p < 0.001) and anxiety (β = 3.64, 95% CI [3.36, 3.93], p < 0.001), with large effect sizes (Cohen's d > 0.8). Time spent using the programs was also found to be a predictor of the variability in these clinical outcomes (p < 0.001), and accounting for this resulted in significantly better model fits (p < 0.001). User satisfaction ratings were also very high, exceeding 94%.ConclusionsEfforts to improve the representation of male and older adult users are warranted. However, overall, the results demonstrate how digital CBT can be provided at scale and lead to symptom reductions with large effect sizes for patients seeking help for depression and anxiety. The findings substantiate the continued use and expansion of this service in Ireland and the more widespread implementation of similar services in other international public healthcare settings.