Developing mHealth to the Context and Valuation of Injured Patients and Professionals in Hospital Trauma Care: Qualitative and Quantitative Formative Evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Trauma care faces challenges to innovating their services, such as with mobile health (mHealth) app, to improve the quality of care and patients' health experience. Systematic needs inquiries and collaborations with professional and patient end users are highly recommended to develop and prepare future implementations of such innovations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a trauma mHealth app for patient information and support in accordance with the Center for eHealth Research and Disease Management road map and describe experiences of unmet information and support needs among injured patients with trauma, barriers to and facilitators of the provision of information and support among trauma care professionals, and drivers of value of an mHealth app in patients with trauma and trauma care professionals. METHODS: Formative evaluations were conducted using quantitative and qualitative methods. Ten semistructured interviews with patients with trauma and a focus group with 4 trauma care professionals were conducted for contextual inquiry and value specification. User requirements and value drivers were applied in prototyping. Furthermore, a complementary quantitative discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted with 109 Dutch trauma surgeons, which enabled triangulation on value specification results. In the DCE, preferences were stated for hypothetical mHealth products with various attributes. Panel data from the DCE were analyzed using conditional and mixed logit models. RESULTS: Patients disclosed a need for more psychosocial support and easy access to more extensive information on their injury, its consequences, and future prospects. Health care professionals designated workload as an essential issue; a digital solution should not require additional time. The conditional logit model of DCE results suggested that access to patient app data through electronic medical record integration (odds ratio [OR] 3.3, 95% CI 2.55-4.34; P<.001) or a web viewer (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.64-3.31; P<.001) was considered the most important for an mHealth solution by surgeons, followed by the inclusion of periodic self-measurements (OR 2, 95% CI 1.64-2.46; P<.001), the local adjustment of patient information (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.42-2.33; P<.001), local hospital identification (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.31-2.10; P<.001), complication detection (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.21-1.84; P<.001), and the personalization of rehabilitation through artificial intelligence (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.13-1.62; P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of trauma care, end users have many requirements for an mHealth solution that addresses psychosocial functioning; dependable information; and, possibly, a prediction of how a patient's recovery trajectory is evolving. A structured development approach provided insights into value drivers and facilitated mHealth prototype enhancement. The findings imply that iterative development should move on from simple and easily implementable mHealth solutions to those that are suitable for broader innovations of care pathways that most-but plausibly not yet all-end users in trauma care will value. This study could inspire the trauma care community.

The effectiveness of various computer-based interventions for patients with chronic pain or functional somatic syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Computer-based interventions target improvement of physical and emotional functioning in patients with chronic pain and functional somatic syndromes. However, it is unclear to what extent which interventions work and for whom. This systematic review and meta-analysis (registered at PROSPERO, 2016: CRD42016050839) assesses efficacy relative to passive and active control conditions, and explores patient and intervention factors. Controlled studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Pooled standardized mean differences by comparison type, and somatic symptom, health-related quality of life, functional interference, catastrophizing, and depression outcomes were calculated at post-treatment and at 6 or more months follow-up. Risk of bias was assessed. Sub-group analyses were performed by patient and intervention characteristics when heterogeneous outcomes were observed. Maximally, 30 out of 46 eligible studies and 3,387 participants were included per meta-analysis. Mostly, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapies were identified. Significantly higher patient reported outcomes were found in comparisons with passive control groups (standardized mean differences ranged between -.41 and -.18), but not in comparisons with active control groups (SMD = -.26 - -.14). For some outcomes, significant heterogeneity related to patient and intervention characteristics. To conclude, there is a minority of good quality evidence for small positive average effects of computer-based (cognitive) behavior change interventions, similar to traditional modes. These effects may be sustainable. Indications were found as of which interventions work better or more consistently across outcomes for which patients. Future process analyses are recommended in the aim of better understanding individual chances of clinically relevant outcomes.

Serious gaming during multidisciplinary rehabilitation for patients with complex chronic pain or fatigue complaints: study protocol for a controlled trial and process evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Many individuals suffer from chronic pain or functional somatic syndromes and face boundaries for diminishing functional limitations by means of biopsychosocial interventions. Serious gaming could complement multidisciplinary interventions through enjoyment and independent accessibility. A study protocol is presented for studying whether, how, for which patients and under what circumstances, serious gaming improves patient health outcomes during regular multidisciplinary rehabilitation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods design is described that prioritises a two-armed naturalistic quasi-experiment. An experimental group is composed of patients who follow serious gaming during an outpatient multidisciplinary programme at two sites of a Dutch rehabilitation centre. Control group patients follow the same programme without serious gaming in two similar sites. Multivariate mixed-modelling analysis is planned for assessing how much variance in 250 patient records of routinely monitored pain intensity, pain coping and cognition, fatigue and psychopathology outcomes is attributable to serious gaming. Embedded qualitative methods include unobtrusive collection and analyses of stakeholder focus group interviews, participant feedback and semistructured patient interviews. Process analyses are carried out by a systematic approach of mixing qualitative and quantitative methods at various stages of the research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committee of the Tilburg School of Social and Behavioural Sciences approved the research after reviewing the protocol for the protection of patients' interests in conformity to the letter and rationale of the applicable laws and research practice (EC 2016.25t). Findings will be presented in research articles and international scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: A prospective research protocol for the naturalistic quasi-experimental outcome evaluation was entered in the Dutch trial register (registration number: NTR6020; Pre-results).

Feasibility of Applied Gaming During Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation for Patients With Complex Chronic Pain and Fatigue Complaints: A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Applied gaming holds potential as a convenient and engaging means for the delivery of behavioral interventions. For developing and evaluating feasible computer-based interventions, policy makers and designers rely on limited knowledge about what causes variation in usage. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we looked closely at why and by whom an applied game (LAKA) is demanded and whether it is feasible (with respect to acceptability, demand, practicality, implementation, and efficacy) and devised a complementary intervention during an interdisciplinary rehabilitation program (IRP) for patients with complex chronic pain and fatigue complaints. METHODS: A mixed-methods design was used. Quantitative process analyses and assessments of feasibility were carried out with patients of a Dutch rehabilitation center who received access to LAKA without professional support during a 16-week interdisciplinary outpatient program. The quantitative data included records of routinely collected baseline variables (t0), additional surveys to measure technology acceptance before (t1) and after 8 weeks of access to LAKA (t2), and automatic log files of usage behavior (frequency, length, and progress). Subsequently, semistructured interviews were held with purposively selected patients. Interview codes triangulated and illustrated explanations of usage and supplemented quantitative findings on other feasibility domains. RESULTS: Of the 410 eligible patients who started an IRP during the study period, 116 patients participated in additional data collections (108 with problematic fatigue and 47 with moderate or severe pain). Qualitative data verified that hedonic motivation was the most important factor for behavioral intentions to use LAKA (P<.001). Moreover, quotes illustrated a positive association between usage intentions (t1) and baseline level (t0) coping by active engagement (Spearman ρ=0.25; P=.008) and why patients who often respond by seeking social support were represented in a group of 71 patients who accessed the game (P=.034). The median behavioral intention to use LAKA was moderately positive and declined over time. Twenty patients played the game from start to finish. Behavioral change content was recognized and seen as potentially helpful by interview respondents who exposed themselves to the content of LAKA. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in the demand for applied gaming is generally explained by perceived enjoyment and effort and by individual differences in coping resources. An applied game can be offered as a feasible complementary intervention for more patients with complex chronic pain or fatigue complaints by embedding and delivering in alignment with patient experiences. Feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness can be evaluated in a full-scale evaluation. New observations elicit areas of further research on the usage of computer-based interventions.