Previously submitted to: JMIR Formative Research (no longer under consideration since Jan 25, 2019)
Date Submitted: Apr 6, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Apr 9, 2018 - Jun 4, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Users perceived contribution and usability of mobile health applications and connected objects: patients and health care providers perspectives from an exploratory survey
Background:
Technology is nowadays omnipresent. Using New Information and Communications Technologies in the health sector is promising and intended to be beneficial, both for patient disease prevention and care. The Lab e-Santé, a French think tank, aims to further advance knowledge of the use and practices of digital health tools, identify obstacles in their use, and issue recommendations.
Objective:
The Lab e-Santé conducted an exploratory study in order to get preliminary data regarding the appropriation, satisfaction and global use in real life of health applications and connected objects. This initial survey would allow to explore, within MHCs (Multidisciplinary health centers), the usability and the perceived contribution of the tools from both HCPs and patients’ viewpoints and provide preliminary inputs regarding the barriers and the drivers of connected health.
Methods:
The Lab e-santé recruited a total of 10 facilities from the exhaustive database of French MHCs. HCPs from those MHC were provided with iPads on which the m-health application was installed. They were also provided with three types of connected devices: weighting scales, blood pressure monitors and activity trackers. VirtualSanté and VirtualSanté Pro applications were especially developed for the survey. VirtualSanté allowed to compile all the patient’s data collected from a connected health device, and share these data with the health professional in their dedicated professional application, VirtualSanté Pro. During a 5-month period, participating health professionals were instructed to include patients with chronic diseases, aged 18 years and above, who agreed to participate.
Results:
This exploratory study addressed the perceived contribution and usability of health technologies from both patients and their HCPs. Our findings as described below suggest that there is a dichotomy between HCPs and patients’ perception about connected health usefulness. HCPs are more confident in a potential contribution of connected health for their patients than the patients themselves. Patients didn’t express any benefit 6 months later and the device became a source of anxiety for some of them. One possible explanation may be the multiple technical issues users faced during the survey including the installation of the applications on non-compatible devices, the initial connection between the object and the application or technical bugs during use. For the same reasons, HCPs found it time-consuming and difficult to integrate in their everyday practice.
Conclusions:
Today many people are optimistic about the concept of mHealth. However, to use these devices and have high acceptance, both HCPs and patients need to be aware of the existence and usefulness of applications and connected objects then trust them. Tools should be personalized and adaptive, as far as possible, or at least be adapted to the good user profile. The latter should be motivated, properly trained, educated and supported for assuring an appropriate, useful and sustainable use.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.