Katherine Morton1, Laura Dennison2, Carl May3, Elizabeth Murray4, Paul Little5, Richard J McManus6, Lucy Yardley7. 1. Academic unit of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: ksm1r13@soton.ac.uk. 2. Academic unit of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: l.k.dennison@soton.ac.uk. 3. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: c.r.may@soton.ac.uk. 4. Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: Elizabeth.murray@ucl.ac.uk. 5. Primary Care Research, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: P.Little@soton.ac.uk. 6. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: richard.mcmanus@phc.ox.ac.uk. 7. Academic unit of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: L.Yardley@soton.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To understand the experiences of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) using self-management digital interventions (DIs) for chronic physical health conditions. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in 6 electronic databases. Qualitative studies describing users' experiences of self-management DIs were included, and authors' interpretations were synthesised using meta-ethnography. RESULTS: 30 papers met the inclusion criteria, covering a range of DIs and chronic conditions, including hypertension, asthma and heart disease. The review found that patients monitoring their health felt reassured by the insight this provided, and perceived they had more meaningful consultations with the HCP. These benefits were elicited by simple tele-monitoring systems as well as multifaceted DIs. Patients appeared to feel more reliant on HCPs if they received regular feedback from the HCP. HCPs focused mainly on their improved clinical control, and some also appreciated patients' increased understanding of their condition. CONCLUSIONS: Patients using self-management DIs tend to feel well cared for and perceive that they adopt a more active role in consultations, whilst HCPs focus on the clinical benefits provided by DIs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: DIs can simultaneously support patient condition management, and HCPs' control of patient health. Tele-monitoring physiological data can promote complex behaviour change amongst patients.
OBJECTIVES: To understand the experiences of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) using self-management digital interventions (DIs) for chronic physical health conditions. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in 6 electronic databases. Qualitative studies describing users' experiences of self-management DIs were included, and authors' interpretations were synthesised using meta-ethnography. RESULTS: 30 papers met the inclusion criteria, covering a range of DIs and chronic conditions, including hypertension, asthma and heart disease. The review found that patients monitoring their health felt reassured by the insight this provided, and perceived they had more meaningful consultations with the HCP. These benefits were elicited by simple tele-monitoring systems as well as multifaceted DIs. Patients appeared to feel more reliant on HCPs if they received regular feedback from the HCP. HCPs focused mainly on their improved clinical control, and some also appreciated patients' increased understanding of their condition. CONCLUSIONS: Patients using self-management DIs tend to feel well cared for and perceive that they adopt a more active role in consultations, whilst HCPs focus on the clinical benefits provided by DIs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: DIs can simultaneously support patient condition management, and HCPs' control of patient health. Tele-monitoring physiological data can promote complex behaviour change amongst patients.
Authors: Valerie van Kruijssen; AnneLoes van Staa; Jolanda Dwarswaard; Johannes Ccm In 't Veen; Bianka Mennema; Samantha A Adams Journal: Respir Care Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 2.258
Authors: Richelle J Koopman; Bonnie J Wakefield; Jennifer L Johanning; Lynn E Keplinger; Robin L Kruse; Marilee Bomar; Beth Bernt; Douglas S Wakefield; David R Mehr Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2013-12-18 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: R Campbell; P Pound; M Morgan; G Daker-White; N Britten; R Pill; L Yardley; C Pope; J Donovan Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Jenny Ure; Hilary Pinnock; Janet Hanley; Gillian Kidd; Emily McCall Smith; Alex Tarling; Claudia Pagliari; Aziz Sheikh; William MacNee; Brian McKinstry Journal: Prim Care Respir J Date: 2012-03
Authors: Cicely Kerr; Elizabeth Murray; Lorraine Noble; Richard Morris; Christian Bottomley; Fiona Stevenson; David Patterson; Richard Peacock; Indra Turner; Keith Jackson; Irwin Nazareth Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2010-12-02 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Salla Atkins; Simon Lewin; Helen Smith; Mark Engel; Atle Fretheim; Jimmy Volmink Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2008-04-16 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Ana Howarth; Muhammad Riaz; Linda Perkins-Porras; Jared G Smith; Jeevakan Subramaniam; Claire Copland; Mike Hurley; Iain Beith; Michael Ussher Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2019-04-22
Authors: Kate Greenwell; Ben Ainsworth; Anne Bruton; Elizabeth Murray; Daniel Russell; Mike Thomas; Lucy Yardley Journal: NPJ Prim Care Respir Med Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 2.871
Authors: Kingshuk Pal; Charlotte Dack; Jamie Ross; Susan Michie; Carl May; Fiona Stevenson; Andrew Farmer; Lucy Yardley; Maria Barnard; Elizabeth Murray Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-01-29 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Lynn Austin; Charlotte A Sharp; Sabine N van der Veer; Matthew Machin; John Humphreys; Peter Mellor; Jill McCarthy; John Ainsworth; Caroline Sanders; William G Dixon Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 7.580