Literature DB >> 33635278

Rural Residents' Perspectives on an mHealth or Personalized Health Coaching Intervention: Qualitative Study With Focus Groups and Key Informant Interviews.

Nancy Schoenberg1, Madeline Dunfee1, Hannah Yeager2, Matthew Rutledge3, Angela Pfammatter4, Bonnie Spring4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Compared with national averages, rural Appalachians experience extremely elevated rates of premature morbidity and mortality. New opportunities, including approaches incorporating personal technology, may help improve lifestyles and overcome health inequities.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to gather perspectives on whether a healthy lifestyle intervention, specifically an app originally designed for urban users, may be feasible and acceptable to rural residents. In addition to a smartphone app, this program-Make Better Choices 2-consists of personalized health coaching, accelerometer use, and financial incentives.
METHODS: We convened 4 focus groups and 16 key informant interviews with diverse community stakeholders to assess perspectives on this novel, evidence-based diet and physical activity intervention. Participants were shown a slide presentation and asked open-ended follow-up questions. The focus group and key informant interview sessions were audiotaped, transcribed, and subjected to thematic analysis.
RESULTS: We identified 3 main themes regarding Appalachian residents' perspectives on this mobile health (mHealth) intervention: personal technology is feasible and desirable; challenges persist in implementing mHealth lifestyle interventions in Appalachian communities; and successful mHealth interventions should include personal connections, local coaches, and educational opportunities. Although viewed as feasible and acceptable overall, lack of healthy lifestyle awareness, habitual behavior, and financial constraints may challenge the success of mHealth lifestyle interventions in Appalachia. Finally, participants described several minor elements that require modification, including expanding the upper age inclusion, providing extra coaching on technology use, emphasizing personal and supportive connections, employing local coaches, and ensuring adequate educational content for the program.
CONCLUSIONS: Blending new technologies, health coaching, and other features is not only acceptable but may be essential to reach vulnerable rural residents. ©Nancy Schoenberg, Madeline Dunfee, Hannah Yeager, Matthew Rutledge, Angela Pfammatter, Bonnie Spring. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (http://formative.jmir.org), 26.02.2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  community-based participatory research; diet; exercise; mobile phone; rural populations; technology

Year:  2021        PMID: 33635278      PMCID: PMC7954651          DOI: 10.2196/18853

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JMIR Form Res        ISSN: 2561-326X


  22 in total

Review 1.  Use of constant comparative analysis in qualitative research.

Authors:  J Hewitt-Taylor
Journal:  Nurs Stand       Date:  2001 Jul 4-10

Review 2.  The effectiveness of smoking cessation, physical activity/diet and alcohol reduction interventions delivered by mobile phones for the prevention of non-communicable diseases: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Melissa Palmer; Jennifer Sutherland; Sharmani Barnard; Aileen Wynne; Emma Rezel; Andrew Doel; Lily Grigsby-Duffy; Suzanne Edwards; Sophie Russell; Ellie Hotopf; Pablo Perel; Caroline Free
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Welcome to the world of mHealth!

Authors:  Steven Tucker
Journal:  Mhealth       Date:  2015-03-10

4.  Increasing the public health impact of evidence-based interventions in behavioral medicine: new approaches and future directions.

Authors:  Joanna Buscemi; E Amy Janke; Kari C Kugler; Jenna Duffecy; Thelma J Mielenz; Sara M St George; Sherri N Sheinfeld Gorin
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2016-08-01

5.  Widening Disparities In Infant Mortality And Life Expectancy Between Appalachia And The Rest Of The United States, 1990-2013.

Authors:  Gopal K Singh; Michael D Kogan; Rebecca T Slifkin
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 6.  Lifestyle interventions based on the diabetes prevention program delivered via eHealth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kevin L Joiner; Soohyun Nam; Robin Whittemore
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 4.018

7.  Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to produce actionable findings: a rapid-cycle evaluation approach to improving implementation.

Authors:  Rosalind E Keith; Jesse C Crosson; Ann S O'Malley; DeAnn Cromp; Erin Fries Taylor
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  Reducing Potentially Excess Deaths from the Five Leading Causes of Death in the Rural United States

Authors:  Macarena C Garcia; Mark Faul; Greta Massetti; Cheryll C Thomas; Yuling Hong; Ursula E Bauer; Michael F Iademarco
Journal:  MMWR Surveill Summ       Date:  2017-01-13

9.  Multicomponent mHealth Intervention for Large, Sustained Change in Multiple Diet and Activity Risk Behaviors: The Make Better Choices 2 Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Bonnie Spring; Christine Pellegrini; H G McFadden; Angela Fidler Pfammatter; Tammy K Stump; Juned Siddique; Abby C King; Donald Hedeker
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Study protocol: mobile improvement of self-management ability through rural technology (mI SMART).

Authors:  Jennifer A Mallow; Laurie A Theeke; Dustin M Long; Tara Whetsel; Elliott Theeke; Brian K Mallow
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2015-08-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.