Literature DB >> 36102548

From Testers to Cocreators-the Value of and Approaches to Successful Patient Engagement in the Development of eHealth Solutions: Qualitative Expert Interview Study.

Steven Bourke1, Christine Jacob2, Sabina Heuss3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Research has shown that patient engagement is most commonly done at the beginning of research or to test readily available prototypes and less commonly done in other phases such as the execution phases. Previous studies have reported that patients are usually assigned a consultative rather than a decision-making role in health service planning and evaluation.
OBJECTIVE: This study had 2 objectives: to better understand the challenges and opportunities in the inclusion of patients in the development of eHealth technologies and ideas on how to overcome the identified gaps and to create a research-based end-to-end practical blueprint that can guide the relevant stakeholders to successfully engage patients as cocreators in all human-centered design phases rather than mere testers of preplanned prototypes.
METHODS: Key informant interviews were conducted using in-depth semistructured interviews with 20 participants from 6 countries across Europe. This was followed by a focus group to validate the initial findings. Participants encompassed all the relevant stakeholder groups including patient experts, eHealth experts, health technology providers, clinicians, pharma executives, and health insurance experts.
RESULTS: This study shows that engaging patients in eHealth development can help provide different types of value; namely, identifying unmet needs, better usability and desirability, better fit into the patient journey, better adoption and stickiness, better health outcomes, advocacy and trust, a sense of purpose, and better health equity and access. However, the participants agreed that patients are usually engaged too late in the development process, mostly assuming a sounding role in testing a ready-made prototype. The justification for these gaps in engagement is driven by some prominent barriers, notably compliance risks, patient-related factors, power dynamics, patient engagement as lip service, poor value perception, lack of resources, mistrust, and inflexibility. On the positive side, the participants also reflected on facilitators for better patient engagement; for instance, engaging through engagement partners, novel approaches such as the rise of professional patient experts, embedding patients in development teams, expectation management, and professional moderation services.
CONCLUSIONS: Overcoming the current gaps in patient engagement in eHealth development requires consolidated efforts from all stakeholders in a complex health care ecosystem. The shift toward more patient-driven eHealth development requires education and awareness; frameworks to monitor and evaluate the value of patient engagement; regulatory clarity and simplification; platforms to facilitate patient access and identification; patient incentivization, transparency, and trust; and a mindset shift toward value-based health care. ©Christine Jacob, Steven Bourke, Sabina Heuss. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (https://humanfactors.jmir.org), 06.10.2022.

Entities:  

Keywords:  eHealth; electronic health record; health education; mHealth; mobile health; mobile phone; patient empowerment; patient engagement; patient voice; patients; perception; public health practice; smartphone; technology; telehealth; telemedicine

Year:  2022        PMID: 36102548      PMCID: PMC9585443          DOI: 10.2196/41481

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JMIR Hum Factors        ISSN: 2292-9495


  36 in total

1.  Qualitative research interviews.

Authors:  Sarah Knox; Alan W Burkard
Journal:  Psychother Res       Date:  2009-07

2.  Improving Patient Involvement in Medicines Research and Development:: A Practical Roadmap.

Authors:  Jan Geissler; Bettina Ryll; Susanna Leto di Priolo; Mary Uhlenhopp
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 1.778

3.  The Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool: forward-backwards translation and cultural adaption to Norwegian.

Authors:  Andrew Garratt; Joachim Sagen; Elin Børøsund; Cecilie Varsi; Ingvild Kjeken; Hanne Dagfinrud; Rikke Helene Moe
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 2.562

Review 4.  Unraveling the meaning of patient engagement: A concept analysis.

Authors:  Tracy Higgins; Elaine Larson; Rebecca Schnall
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2016-09-03

Review 5.  Tackling clinical inertia: Use of coproduction to improve patient engagement.

Authors:  Carmen Soto; William David Strain
Journal:  J Diabetes       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 4.006

6.  How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set.

Authors:  Iain Chalmers; Michael B Bracken; Ben Djulbegovic; Silvio Garattini; Jonathan Grant; A Metin Gülmezoglu; David W Howells; John P A Ioannidis; Sandy Oliver
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  A qualitative analysis of interprofessional healthcare team members' perceptions of patient barriers to healthcare engagement.

Authors:  Rhea E Powell; Amanda Doty; Robin J Casten; Barry W Rovner; Kristin L Rising
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Making Patient Engagement a Reality.

Authors:  Daphnee S Pushparajah
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  Supporting the evaluation of public and patient engagement in health system organizations: Results from an implementation research study.

Authors:  Julia Abelson; Laura Tripp; Sujane Kandasamy; Kristen Burrows
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 10.  Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study.

Authors:  Gloria A Aguayo; Catherine Goetzinger; Renza Scibilia; Aurélie Fischer; Till Seuring; Viet-Thi Tran; Philippe Ravaud; Tamás Bereczky; Laetitia Huiart; Guy Fagherazzi
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.