Sara F Jacoby1,2, Andrew J Robinson3, Jessica L Webster3, Christopher N Morrison4,5, Therese S Richmond2,3. 1. Department of Family and Community Health, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. University of Pennsylvania Injury Science Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Biobehavioral Health Sciences, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traumatic injuries are a health event that can begin a trajectory towards chronic health and social challenges. Mobile technology-based prevention and treatment interventions have been used to monitor and transform outcomes across a myriad of health conditions, but their potential in long-term injury recovery is unexplored. The goal of this pilot study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of mobile health monitoring for long-term outcomes in a population of trauma patients with known barriers to health and social care after injury. METHODS: We re-recruited 25 individuals, 12-36 months after acute hospitalization, from a recently concluded study of psychological outcomes in seriously injured Black men in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This mixed- methods pilot study was conducted in three phases: (I) qualitative interviews and development of a pilot monitoring platform; (II) a 3-month feasibility trial of mobile monitoring of patient-reported outcomes and biometric data using a wrist-worn commercial fitness monitor (n=18); (III) post-implementation qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Analysis of data from pre-implementation interviews indicated that the majority of participants used smartphones as a primary means of communicating with their social network and to access the internet. The 90-day pilot trial of mobile monitoring indicated participants' preference text-delivered communication and survey elicitation. Response rates for 12 automated surveys ranged from 84-92%. Twenty-four hours a day adherence to optional biometric monitoring was generally lower than 50% but ranged widely indicating both very low adherence and very high adherence. Four of 25 participants, 2 who had opted for Fitbit monitoring, were lost to follow-up at the end of the 90-day pilot trial. In post-implementation assessments, participants endorsed the acceptability of mobile monitoring highlighting the benefit of its convenience and flexibility over in-person outcome monitoring. Participants also perceived its potential benefit in long-term engagement with health and social services to assist with the challenges they faced when attempting to achieve physical, psychological, social, and financial recovery after hospitalization. These findings were reinforced through qualitative interviews which highlighted, in addition to acceptability, the perceived value of self-monitoring through the use of wearable devices to track health data like physical activity and sleep. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates the feasibility and acceptability of mobile health monitoring used to examine long-term injury sequalae. Future research may leverage this novel strategy, refining its application to address current limitations in the reliability and accuracy of commercially available wearable technology, relative costs and benefits of different mobile data collection strategies, integration within current clinical paradigms and generalizability across injured populations and socio-ecological environments. 2021 mHealth. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Traumatic injuries are a health event that can begin a trajectory towards chronic health and social challenges. Mobile technology-based prevention and treatment interventions have been used to monitor and transform outcomes across a myriad of health conditions, but their potential in long-term injury recovery is unexplored. The goal of this pilot study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of mobile health monitoring for long-term outcomes in a population of trauma patients with known barriers to health and social care after injury. METHODS: We re-recruited 25 individuals, 12-36 months after acute hospitalization, from a recently concluded study of psychological outcomes in seriously injured Black men in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This mixed- methods pilot study was conducted in three phases: (I) qualitative interviews and development of a pilot monitoring platform; (II) a 3-month feasibility trial of mobile monitoring of patient-reported outcomes and biometric data using a wrist-worn commercial fitness monitor (n=18); (III) post-implementation qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Analysis of data from pre-implementation interviews indicated that the majority of participants used smartphones as a primary means of communicating with their social network and to access the internet. The 90-day pilot trial of mobile monitoring indicated participants' preference text-delivered communication and survey elicitation. Response rates for 12 automated surveys ranged from 84-92%. Twenty-four hours a day adherence to optional biometric monitoring was generally lower than 50% but ranged widely indicating both very low adherence and very high adherence. Four of 25 participants, 2 who had opted for Fitbit monitoring, were lost to follow-up at the end of the 90-day pilot trial. In post-implementation assessments, participants endorsed the acceptability of mobile monitoring highlighting the benefit of its convenience and flexibility over in-person outcome monitoring. Participants also perceived its potential benefit in long-term engagement with health and social services to assist with the challenges they faced when attempting to achieve physical, psychological, social, and financial recovery after hospitalization. These findings were reinforced through qualitative interviews which highlighted, in addition to acceptability, the perceived value of self-monitoring through the use of wearable devices to track health data like physical activity and sleep. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates the feasibility and acceptability of mobile health monitoring used to examine long-term injury sequalae. Future research may leverage this novel strategy, refining its application to address current limitations in the reliability and accuracy of commercially available wearable technology, relative costs and benefits of different mobile data collection strategies, integration within current clinical paradigms and generalizability across injured populations and socio-ecological environments. 2021 mHealth. All rights reserved.
Entities:
Keywords:
Trauma; injury; mobile health monitoring; monitoring; outcomes; recovery; smartphones; symptoms; wearable sensors
Authors: Constantine S Velmahos; Juan P Herrera-Escobar; Syeda S Al Rafai; Shelby Chun Fat; Haytham Kaafarani; Deepika Nehra; George Kasotakis; Ali Salim; Adil H Haider Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Douglas F Zatzick; Ali Rowhani-Rahbar; Jin Wang; Joan Russo; Doyanne Darnell; Leah Ingraham; Lauren K Whiteside; Roxanne Guiney; Margot Kelly Hedrick; Frederick P Rivara Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Melissa E Milanak; Kelly L Zuromski; Ian Cero; Allison K Wilkerson; Heidi S Resnick; Dean G Kilpatrick Journal: J Trauma Stress Date: 2019-01-31
Authors: Matthew Price; Kenneth J Ruggiero; Pamela L Ferguson; Sachin K Patel; Frank Treiber; Deborah Couillard; Samir M Fahkry Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2014-02-11 Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Tatiana M Davidson; Brian E Bunnell; Benjamin E Saunders; Rochelle F Hanson; Carla K Danielson; Danna Cook; Brian C Chu; Shannon Dorsey; Zachary W Adams; Arthur R Andrews; Jesse H Walker; Kathryn E Soltis; Judith A Cohen; Esther Deblinger; Kenneth J Ruggiero Journal: Behav Ther Date: 2018-07-27
Authors: Lan Yu; Daniel J Buysse; Anne Germain; Douglas E Moul; Angela Stover; Nathan E Dodds; Kelly L Johnston; Paul A Pilkonis Journal: Behav Sleep Med Date: 2011-12-28 Impact factor: 2.964
Authors: Stephen T Wegener; Eben A Carroll; Joshua L Gary; Todd O McKinley; Robert V OʼToole; Debra L Sietsema; Renan C Castillo; Katherine P Frey; Daniel O Scharfstein; Yanjie Huang; Susan C J Collins; Ellen J MacKenzie Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Cathy A Alessi; Jennifer L Martin; Adam P Webber; Tarannum Alam; Michael R Littner; Judith O Harker; Karen R Josephson Journal: Sleep Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Colby J Hyland; Ruby Guo; Ravi Dhawan; Manraj N Kaur; Paul A Bain; Maria O Edelen; Andrea L Pusic Journal: J Patient Rep Outcomes Date: 2022-03-07