Jennifer Dickman Portz1,2, Kelsey Ford2, David B Bekelman1,3, Rebecca S Boxer4, Jean S Kutner1, Sara Czaja5, Kira Elsbernd2, Sheana Bull2. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado. 2. mHealth Impact Lab, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Department of Medicine, Department of Veterans Affairs, Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Aurora, Colorado. 4. Insitute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Aurora, Colorado. 5. Division of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Abstract
Background: Mobile health (mHealth) is a promising tool for improving health outcomes. However, the benefits of using mHealth in palliative care are under studied. Objective: As a first step to designing meaningful palliative care-specific mobile applications, this research explored provider perspectives regarding the utility of mHealth in palliative care. Design: A qualitative phenomenological study with semistructured interviews. Setting/Subjects: Providers from multiple disciplines working in palliative care settings at an academic medical center. Results: Thematic analysis resulted in five provider recommendations regarding the utility and design of palliative care-specific mHealth, including (i) thoughtfulness to language, context, and delivery when assessing palliative care needs; (ii) include tools for prognosis and advance care planning; (iii) tailor health and quality-of-life goals; (iv) emphasize supports for family and caregivers; and (v) consider technology abilities of older adults. Conclusions: Palliative care providers are enthusiastic about the use of mHealth to improve care coordination, facilitate communication, enhance symptom monitoring, and improve patient-family support. However, providers have reservations about mobile functionality and depersonalized assessment and care. Providers stress the utility of mHealth to facilitate palliative care rather than replace important multidisciplinary services.
Background: Mobile health (mHealth) is a promising tool for improving health outcomes. However, the benefits of using mHealth in palliative care are under studied. Objective: As a first step to designing meaningful palliative care-specific mobile applications, this research explored provider perspectives regarding the utility of mHealth in palliative care. Design: A qualitative phenomenological study with semistructured interviews. Setting/Subjects: Providers from multiple disciplines working in palliative care settings at an academic medical center. Results: Thematic analysis resulted in five provider recommendations regarding the utility and design of palliative care-specific mHealth, including (i) thoughtfulness to language, context, and delivery when assessing palliative care needs; (ii) include tools for prognosis and advance care planning; (iii) tailor health and quality-of-life goals; (iv) emphasize supports for family and caregivers; and (v) consider technology abilities of older adults. Conclusions: Palliative care providers are enthusiastic about the use of mHealth to improve care coordination, facilitate communication, enhance symptom monitoring, and improve patient-family support. However, providers have reservations about mobile functionality and depersonalized assessment and care. Providers stress the utility of mHealth to facilitate palliative care rather than replace important multidisciplinary services.
Entities:
Keywords:
digital health; family caregiving; health information technology; mobile device; patient reported outcomes; social support
Authors: Christopher E Cox; Derek M Jones; Wen Reagan; Mary D Key; Vinca Chow; Jessica McFarlin; David Casarett; Claire J Creutzfeldt; Sharron L Docherty Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2018-01
Authors: Huyen Phuc Do; Bach Xuan Tran; Quyen Le Pham; Long Hoang Nguyen; Tung Thanh Tran; Carl A Latkin; Michael P Dunne; Philip Ra Baker Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 2.711
Authors: Jennifer Dickman Portz; Kelsey Lynett Ford; Katherine Doyon; David B Bekelman; Rebecca S Boxer; Jean S Kutner; Sara Czaja; Sheana Bull Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Virginia LeBaron; Rachel Bennett; Ridwan Alam; Leslie Blackhall; Kate Gordon; James Hayes; Nutta Homdee; Randy Jones; Yudel Martinez; Emmanuel Ogunjirin; Tanya Thomas; John Lach Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2020-08-26
Authors: Benzi M Kluger; Cornelia Drees; Thomas R Wodushek; Lauren Frey; Laura Strom; Mesha-Gay Brown; Jacquelyn L Bainbridge; Sarah N Fischer; Archana Shrestha; Mark Spitz Journal: Epilepsy Behav Date: 2020-11-24 Impact factor: 3.337
Authors: Jennifer Dickman Portz; Kelsey Lynett Ford; Kira Elsbernd; Christopher E Knoepke; Kelsey Flint; David B Bekelman; Rebecca S Boxer; Sheana Bull Journal: JMIR Cardio Date: 2020-09-04