Henning Daus1, Natalia Kislicyn2, Stephan Heuer3, Matthias Backenstrass4. 1. Institute of Clinical Psychology, Centre for Mental Health, Klinikum Stuttgart, Germany; Faculty of Science, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Germany. Electronic address: h.daus@klinikum-stuttgart.de. 2. ITK Engineering GmbH, Rülzheim, Germany; Institute for Digital Signal Processing, Mannheim University of Applied Sciences, Germany. 3. ITK Engineering GmbH, Rülzheim, Germany. 4. Institute of Clinical Psychology, Centre for Mental Health, Klinikum Stuttgart, Germany; Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, Ruprecht-Karls-University Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smartphone-based disease management has become increasingly interesting for research in the field of bipolar disorders. This article investigates the attitudes of persons affected by this disorder towards the appropriation of mobile apps or assistance systems for the management of their disease. METHODS: We conducted two separate studies. Study 1 was an online survey with 88 participants. In study 2 we consulted 15 participants during a semi-structured interview. All the participants had formerly been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. RESULTS: More than half of the participants of study 1 and most participants of study 2 agreed with the use of an app or assistance system for self-ratings, third party ratings and an objective symptom monitoring. Potential interventions that were popular in both groups included a regular feedback, the visualization of monitored data and advice in crises. LIMITATIONS: With study 1 we were not able to ensure correct diagnoses or to interact in a flexible way. In Study 2 those issues were resolved, but the small number of participants raises the question of a possible generalisability of the results. Furthermore, for both studies a selection bias could not be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate positive attitudes of bipolar patients towards disease management apps and assistance systems. Even new and innovative features such as partner apps or the analysis of facial expressions in video data were appreciated and daily interactions were favoured. However, the variety of answers calls for flexible systems which allow activating or deactivating certain features.
BACKGROUND: Smartphone-based disease management has become increasingly interesting for research in the field of bipolar disorders. This article investigates the attitudes of persons affected by this disorder towards the appropriation of mobile apps or assistance systems for the management of their disease. METHODS: We conducted two separate studies. Study 1 was an online survey with 88 participants. In study 2 we consulted 15 participants during a semi-structured interview. All the participants had formerly been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. RESULTS: More than half of the participants of study 1 and most participants of study 2 agreed with the use of an app or assistance system for self-ratings, third party ratings and an objective symptom monitoring. Potential interventions that were popular in both groups included a regular feedback, the visualization of monitored data and advice in crises. LIMITATIONS: With study 1 we were not able to ensure correct diagnoses or to interact in a flexible way. In Study 2 those issues were resolved, but the small number of participants raises the question of a possible generalisability of the results. Furthermore, for both studies a selection bias could not be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate positive attitudes of bipolarpatients towards disease management apps and assistance systems. Even new and innovative features such as partner apps or the analysis of facial expressions in video data were appreciated and daily interactions were favoured. However, the variety of answers calls for flexible systems which allow activating or deactivating certain features.
Authors: Tijana Sagorac Gruichich; Juan Camilo David Gomez; Gabriel Zayas-Cabán; Melvin G McInnis; Amy L Cochran Journal: Bipolar Disord Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 6.744
Authors: Lindsay H Dewa; Mary Lavelle; Katy Pickles; Caroline Kalorkoti; Jack Jaques; Sofia Pappa; Paul Aylin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: David C Mohr; Geneva K Jonathan; Cynthia A Dopke; Tania Michaels; Andrew Bank; Clair R Martin; Krina Adhikari; Rachel L Krakauer; Chloe Ryan; Alyssa McBride; Pamela Babington; Ella Frauenhofer; Jamilah Silver; Courtney Capra; Melanie Simon; Mark Begale; Evan H Goulding Journal: JMIR Ment Health Date: 2021-04-12
Authors: Frederike T Fellendorf; Carlo Hamm; Nina Dalkner; Martina Platzer; Matteo C Sattler; Susanne A Bengesser; Melanie Lenger; Rene Pilz; Armin Birner; Robert Queissner; Adelina Tmava-Berisha; Michaela Ratzenhofer; Alexander Maget; Mireille van Poppel; Eva Z Reininghaus Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 4.157