Dataset Information

Patient perspectives on digital healthcare technology in care and clinical trials for motor neuron disease: an international survey.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

To capture the patient's attitude toward remote monitoring of motor neuron disease (MND) in care and clinical trials, and their concerns and preferences regarding the use of digital technology.

Methods

We performed an international multi-centre survey study in three MND clinics in The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Australia. The survey was co-developed by investigators and patients with MND, and sent to patients by e-mail or postal-mail. The main topics included: patients' attitude towards remote care, participating in decentralized clinical trials, and preferences for and concerns with digital technology use.

Results

In total, 332 patients with MND participated. A majority of patients indicated they would be happy to self-monitor their health from home (69%), be remotely monitored by a multidisciplinary care team (75%), and would be willing to participate in clinical trials from home (65%). Patients considered respiratory function and muscle strength most valuable for home-monitoring. The majority of patients considered the use of at least three devices/apps (75%) once a week (61%) to be acceptable for home-monitoring. Fifteen percent of patients indicated they would not wish to perform home-measurements; reporting concerns about the burden and distress of home-monitoring, privacy and data security.

Conclusion

Most patients with MND exhibited a positive attitude toward the use of digital technology in both care and clinical trial settings. A subgroup of patients reported concerns with home-monitoring, which should be addressed in order to improve widespread adoption of remote digital technology in clinical MND care.

SUBMITTER: Helleman J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9294855 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient perspectives on digital healthcare technology in care and clinical trials for motor neuron disease: an international survey.

Helleman Jochem J Johnson Barbara B Holdom Cory C Hobson Esther E Murray Deirdre D Steyn Frederik J FJ Ngo Shyuan T ST Henders Anjali A Lokeshappa Madhura B MB Visser-Meily Johanna M A JMA van den Berg Leonard H LH Hardiman Orla O Beelen Anita A McDermott Chris C van Eijk Ruben P A RPA

Journal of neurology 20220718 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>To capture the patient's attitude toward remote monitoring of motor neuron disease (MND) in care and clinical trials, and their concerns and preferences regarding the use of digital technology.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed an international multi-centre survey study in three MND clinics in The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Australia. The survey was co-developed by investigators and patients with MND, and sent to patients by e-mail or postal-mail. The main topics include ...[more]

PMID: 35849154

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly collected in clinical trials as they provide unique information on the physical, functional and psychological impact of a treatment from the patient's perspective. Recent research suggests that PRO trial data have the potential to inform shared decision-making, support pharmaceutical labelling claims and influence healthcare policy and practice. However, there remains limited evidence regarding the actual impact associated with PRO trial data and how to maximise PRO impact to benefit patients and society. Thus, our objective was to qualitatively explore international stakeholders' perspectives surrounding: a) the impact of PRO trial data, b) impact measurement metrics, and c) barriers and facilitators to effectively maximise the impact of PRO trial data upon patients and society.MethodsSemi-structured interviews with 24 international stakeholders were conducted between May and October 2018. Data were coded and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.ResultsInternational stakeholders emphasised the impact of PRO trial data to benefit patients and society. Influence on policy-impact, including changes to clinical healthcare practice and guidelines, drug approval and promotional labelling claims were common types of PRO impact reported by interviewees. Interviewees suggested impact measurement metrics including: number of pharmaceutical labelling claims and interviews with healthcare practitioners to determine whether PRO data were incorporated in clinical decision-making. Key facilitators to PRO impact highlighted by stakeholders included: standardisation of PRO tools; consideration of health utilities when selecting PRO measures; adequate funding to support PRO research; improved reporting and dissemination of PRO trial data by key opinion leaders and patients; and development of legal enforcement of the collection of PRO data.ConclusionsDetermining the impact of PRO trial data is essential to better allocate funds, minimise research waste and to help maximise the impact of these data for patients and society. However, measuring the impact of PRO trial data through metrics is a challenging task, as current measures do not capture the total impact of PRO research. Broader international multi-stakeholder engagement and collaboration is needed to standardise PRO assessment and maximise the impact of PRO trial data to benefit patients and society.

Project description:BackgroundDigital technology has the potential to transform psychiatry, but its adoption has been limited. The proliferation of telepsychiatry during the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the urgency of optimizing technology for clinical practice. Understanding clinician attitudes and preferences is crucial to effective implementation and patient benefit.ObjectiveOur objective was to elicit clinician perspectives on emerging digital technology.MethodsClinicians in a large psychiatry department (inpatient and outpatient) were invited to complete a web-based survey about their attitudes toward digital technology in practice, focusing on implementation, clinical benefits, and expectations about patients' attitudes. The survey consisted of 23 questions that could be answered on either a 3-point or 5-point Likert scale. We report the frequencies and percentages of responses.ResultsIn total, 139 clinicians completed the survey-they represent a variety of years of experience, credentials, and diagnostic subspecialties (response rate 69.5%). Overall, 83.4% (n=116) of them stated that digital data could improve their practice, and 23.0% (n=32) of responders reported that they had viewed patients' profiles on social media. Among anticipated benefits, clinicians rated symptom self-tracking (n=101, 72.7%) as well as clinical intervention support (n=90, 64.7%) as most promising. Among anticipated challenges, clinicians mostly expressed concerns over greater time demand (n=123, 88.5%) and whether digital data would be actionable (n=107, 77%). Furthermore, 95.0% (n=132) of clinicians expected their patients to share digital data.ConclusionsOverall, clinicians reported a positive attitude toward the use of digital data to not only improve patient outcomes but also highlight significant barriers that implementation would need to overcome. Although clinicians' self-reported attitudes about digital technology may not necessarily translate into behavior, our results suggest that technologies that reduce clinician burden and are easily interpretable have the greatest likelihood of uptake.

Project description:Exoskeleton technology has potential benefits for wheelchair users' health and mobility. However, there are practical barriers to their everyday use as a mobility device. To further understand potential exoskeleton use, and facilitate the development of new technologies, a study was undertaken to explore perspectives of wheelchair users and healthcare professionals on reasons for use of exoskeleton technology, and the importance of a variety of device characteristics.An online survey with quantitative and qualitative components was conducted with wheelchair users and healthcare professionals working directly with individuals with mobility impairments. Respondents rated whether they would use or recommend an exoskeleton for four potential reasons. Seventeen design features were rated and compared in terms of their importance. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to categorize the 17 design features into meaningful groupings. Content analysis was used to identify themes for the open ended questions regarding reasons for use of an exoskeleton.481 survey responses were analyzed, 354 from wheelchair users and 127 from healthcare professionals. The most highly rated reason for potential use or recommendation of an exoskeleton was health benefits. Of the design features, 4 had a median rating of very important: minimization of falls risk, comfort, putting on/taking off the device, and purchase cost. Factor analysis identified two main categories of design features: Functional Activities and Technology Characteristics. Qualitative findings indicated that health and physical benefits, use for activity and access reasons, and psychosocial benefits were important considerations in whether to use or recommend an exoskeleton.This study emphasizes the importance of developing future exoskeletons that are comfortable, affordable, minimize fall risk, and enable functional activities. Findings from this study can be utilized to inform the priorities for future development of this technology.

Project description:BackgroundThe VACCELERATE Pan-European Scientific network aims to strengthen the foundation of vaccine trial research across Europe by following the principles of equity, inclusion, and diversity. The VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry network provides access to vaccine trial sites across the European region and supports a sustainable volunteer platform for identifying potential participants for forthcoming vaccine clinical research.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to approach members of patient advocacy groups (PAGs) across Europe to assess their willingness to register for the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry and their perspectives related to participating in vaccine trials.MethodsIn an effort to understand how to increase recruitment for the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry, a standardized survey was developed in English and translated into 8 different languages (Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Spanish, and Swedish) by the respective National Coordinator team. The online, anonymous survey was circulated, from March 2022 to May 2022, to PAGs across 10 European countries (Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and Sweden) to share with their members. The questionnaire constituted of multiple choice and open-ended questions evaluating information regarding participants' perceptions on participating in vaccine trials and their willingness to become involved in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry.ResultsIn total, 520 responses were collected and analyzed. The PAG members reported that the principal criteria influencing their decision to participate in clinical trials overall are (1) the risks involved, (2) the benefits that will be gained from their potential participation, and (3) the quality and quantity of information provided regarding the trial. The survey revealed that, out of the 520 respondents, 133 individuals across all age groups were "positive" toward registering in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry, with an additional 47 individuals reporting being "very positive." Respondents from Northern European countries were 1.725 (95% CI 1.206-2.468) times more likely to be willing to participate in the VACCELERATE Volunteer Registry than respondents from Southern European countries.ConclusionsFactors discouraging participants from joining vaccine trial registries or clinical trials primarily include concerns of the safety of novel vaccines and a lack of trust in those involved in vaccine development. These outcomes aid in identifying issues and setbacks in present registries, providing the VACCELERATE network with feedback on how to potentially increase participation and enrollment in trials across Europe. Development of European health communication strategies among diverse public communities, especially via PAGs, is the key for increasing patients' willingness to participate in clinical studies.

Project description:BackgroundThe field of digital medicine has seen rapid growth over the past decade. With this unfettered growth, challenges surrounding interoperability have emerged as a critical barrier to translating digital medicine into practice. In order to understand how to mitigate challenges in digital medicine research and practice, this community must understand the landscape of digital medicine professionals, which digital medicine tools are being used and how, and user perspectives on current challenges in the field of digital medicine.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study is to provide information to the digital medicine community that is working to establish frameworks and best practices for interoperability in digital medicine. We sought to learn about the background of digital medicine professionals and determine which sensors and file types are being used most commonly in digital medicine research. We also sought to understand perspectives on digital medicine interoperability.MethodsWe used a web-based survey to query a total of 56 digital medicine professionals from May 1, 2020, to July 10, 2020, on their educational and work experience, the sensors, file types, and toolkits they use professionally, and their perspectives on interoperability in digital medicine.ResultsWe determined that the digital medicine community comes from diverse educational backgrounds and uses a variety of sensors and file types. Sensors measuring physical activity and the cardiovascular system are the most frequently used, and smartphones continue to be the dominant source of digital health information collection in the digital medicine community. We show that there is not a general consensus on file types in digital medicine, and data are currently handled in multiple ways. There is consensus that interoperability is a critical impediment in digital medicine, with 93% (52) of survey respondents in agreement. However, only 36% (20) of respondents currently use tools for interoperability in digital medicine. We identified three key interoperability needs to be met: integration with electronic health records, implementation of standard data schemas, and standard and verifiable methods for digital medicine research. We show that digital medicine professionals are eager to adopt new tools to solve interoperability problems, and we suggest tools to support digital medicine interoperability.ConclusionsUnderstanding the digital medicine community, the sensors and file types they use, and their perspectives on interoperability will enable the development and implementation of solutions that fill critical interoperability gaps in digital medicine. The challenges to interoperability outlined by this study will drive the next steps in creating an interoperable digital medicine community. Establishing best practices to address these challenges and employing platforms for digital medicine interoperability will be essential to furthering the field of digital medicine.

Dataset Information

Patient perspectives on digital healthcare technology in care and clinical trials for motor neuron disease: an international survey.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Patient perspectives on digital healthcare technology in care and clinical trials for motor neuron disease: an international survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets