Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research

Date Submitted: Oct 19, 2020
Date Accepted: May 7, 2021

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Comparing Two Commercially Available Diabetes Apps to Explore Challenges in User Engagement: Randomized Controlled Feasibility Study

Maharaj A, Lim D, Murphy R, Serlachius A

Comparing Two Commercially Available Diabetes Apps to Explore Challenges in User Engagement: Randomized Controlled Feasibility Study

JMIR Form Res 2021;5(6):e25151

DOI: 10.2196/25151

PMID: 34132640

PMCID: 8277312

The Challenges of Engaging Users with Diabetes Apps: A Randomised Controlled Feasibility Study Comparing two Commercially Available Diabetes Apps

  • Alita Maharaj; 
  • David Lim; 
  • Rinki Murphy; 
  • Anna Serlachius

ABSTRACT

Background:

Diabetes apps represent a promising addition to face-to-face self-management interventions, which can be time and resource intensive. However, few randomised controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy of diabetes apps, in particular as a stand-alone intervention without additional clinical support.

Objective:

We used a parallel group randomised trial design to investigate user engagement of two commercially available apps (free versions of Glucose Buddy and mySugr) over two weeks. We hypothesised higher user engagement would be associated with improved self-care behaviours and illness beliefs in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Methods:

Adults with T2D attending outpatient diabetes clinics in Auckland were recruited and randomised (1:1 without blinding) to use either the Glucose Buddy or mySugr diabetes apps. User engagement and self-care behaviours (primary outcome measures) and illness beliefs (secondary outcome) were measured two weeks after baseline. Spearman’s correlations, Mann-Whitney U tests and Wilcoxon-signed ranks tests were used to explore associations between the outcome measures, as well as to investigate changes between and within groups. Six participants were interviewed to further explore acceptability and usability.

Results:

Fifty-eight participants (29/group) completed the two-week follow-up, out of which only 38 reported using the apps (Glucose Buddy = 20; mySugr = 18). Both groups reported low engagement (days used Mdn=4 for Glucose Buddy and Mdn=6.5 for mySugr, P=.06; minutes used Mdn=10 for both groups). No changes were observed in self-care or illness beliefs in either group. Out of the self-care behaviours, only blood glucose testing was significantly associated with minutes of app use (P=.02). The interviews suggested that although both apps were deemed acceptable, they were generally viewed as time-consuming and complex to use.

Conclusions:

Low engagement with both Glucose Buddy and mySugr reflect the challenges associated with engaging users with diabetes apps. The results highlight the need for more clinical support as well as involvement from end users and behaviour change specialists in order to incorporate evidence-based behaviour change techniques to motivate and provide value to users. Clinical Trial: Registered with Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on March 23rd 2018 (ACTRN12618000424202).


 Citation

Please cite as:

Maharaj A, Lim D, Murphy R, Serlachius A

Comparing Two Commercially Available Diabetes Apps to Explore Challenges in User Engagement: Randomized Controlled Feasibility Study

JMIR Form Res 2021;5(6):e25151

DOI: 10.2196/25151

PMID: 34132640

PMCID: 8277312

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© 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.