Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2024; 15(04): 785-797
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1788978
Research Article

Evaluation of a Primary Care-Integrated Mobile Health Intervention to Monitor between-Visit Asthma Symptoms

Jorge A. Sulca Flores
1   Division of General Internal Medicine Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Anuj K. Dalal
1   Division of General Internal Medicine Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
2   Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Jessica Sousa
3   Health Care Division, RAND, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Dinah Foer
2   Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
4   Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Jorge A. Rodriguez
1   Division of General Internal Medicine Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
2   Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Savanna Plombon
1   Division of General Internal Medicine Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
David W. Bates
1   Division of General Internal Medicine Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
2   Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Adriana Arcia
5   Hahn School of Nursing and Health Science, University of San Diego, San Diego, California, United States
,
Robert S. Rudin
3   Health Care Division, RAND, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
› Author Affiliations Funding This project was supported by grant numbers R18HS026432 and R18HS026432-02S1 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate implementation of a digital remote symptom monitoring intervention that delivered weekly symptom questionnaires and included the option to receive nurse callbacks via a mobile app for asthma patients in primary care.

Methods Research questions were structured by the NASSS (Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-up Spread, and Sustainability) framework. Quantitative and qualitative methods assessed scalability of the electronic health record (EHR)-integrated app intervention implemented in a 12-month randomized controlled trial. Data sources included patient asthma control questionnaires; app usage logs; EHRs; and interviews and discussions with patients, primary care providers (PCPs), and nurses.

Results We included app usage data from 190 patients and interview data from 21 patients and several clinician participants. Among 190 patients, average questionnaire completion rate was 72.3% and retention was 78.9% (i.e., 150 patients continued to use the app at the end of the trial period). App use was lower among Hispanic and younger patients and those with fewer years of education. Of 1,185 nurse callback requests offered to patients, 33 (2.8%) were requested. Of 84 PCP participants, 14 (16.7%) accessed the patient-reported data in the EHR. Analyses showed that the intervention was appropriate for all levels of asthma control; had no major technical barriers; was desirable and useful for patient treatment; involved achievable tasks for patients; required modest role changes for clinicians; and was a minimal burden on the organization.

Conclusion A clinically integrated symptom monitoring intervention has strong potential for sustained adoption. Inequitable adoption remains a concern. PCP use of patient-reported data during visits could improve intervention adoption but may not be required for patient benefits.

Keywords

remote symptom monitoring - electronic health record integration - user-centered design - intervention design - mobile health - digital health implementation - asthma

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

This study was approved by the Mass General Brigham and RAND Institutional Review Boards.


Note

Preliminary results were presented at the American Medical Informatics Annual Symposium, November 2023, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States.


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 22 April 2024

Accepted: 17 July 2024

Article published online:
02 October 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Mecklai K, Smith N, Stern AD, Kramer DB. Remote patient monitoring - overdue or overused?. N Engl J Med 2021; 384 (15) 1384-1386
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Kotha R, Streitmatter C, Serdiuk A, Aldawoodi NN, Ackerman RS. Cardiac remote monitoring devices and technologies: a review for the perioperative physician and telemedicine providers. Cureus 2024; 16 (02) e53914
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Getting started with telehealth | Telehealth.HHS.gov. Accessed March 10, 2024 at: https://telehealth.hhs.gov/providers/getting-started#types-of-telehealth
    PubMed
  • 4 Rowland SP, Fitzgerald JE, Holme T, Powell J, McGregor A. What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients?. NPJ Digit Med 2020; 3 (01) 4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 What is telehealth? CCHP. Accessed March 10, 2024 at: https://www.cchpca.org/what-is-telehealth/?category=remote-patient-monitoring
    PubMed
  • 6 Katz ME, Mszar R, Grimshaw AA. et al. Digital health interventions for hypertension management in US populations experiencing health disparities: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7 (02) e2356070
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Alboksmaty A, Beaney T, Elkin S. et al. Effectiveness and safety of pulse oximetry in remote patient monitoring of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review. Lancet Digit Health 2022; 4 (4, Suppl_3) e279-e289
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Vandenberk B, Raj SR. Remote patient monitoring: what have we learned and where are we going?. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep 2023; 17 (06) 103-115
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Thomas EE, Taylor ML, Banbury A. et al. Factors influencing the effectiveness of remote patient monitoring interventions: a realist review. BMJ Open 2021; 11 (08) e051844
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Taylor ML, Thomas EE, Snoswell CL, Smith AC, Caffery LJ. Does remote patient monitoring reduce acute care use? A systematic review. BMJ Open 2021; 11 (03) e040232
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Mehrotra A, Uscher-Pines L. Informing the debate about telemedicine reimbursement - what do we need to know?. N Engl J Med 2022; 387 (20) 1821-1823
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Mosnaim GS, Greiwe J, Jariwala SP, Pleasants R, Merchant R. Digital inhalers and remote patient monitoring for asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2022; 10 (10) 2525-2533
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Kvedar JC, Mittermaier M, Pritzker J. The industry impact of the American Medical Association's Digital Medicine Payment Advisory Group (DMPAG). NPJ Digit Med 2022; 5 (01) 193
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Kew KM, Cates CJ. Home telemonitoring and remote feedback between clinic visits for asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2016 (08) CD011714
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Mammen JR, Java JJ, Halterman J. et al. Development and preliminary results of an electronic medical record (EMR)-integrated smartphone telemedicine program to deliver asthma care remotely. J Telemed Telecare 2021; 27 (04) 217-230
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Gordon WJ, Henderson D, DeSharone A. et al. Remote patient monitoring program for hospital discharged COVID-19 patients. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (05) 792-801
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Gandrup J, Ali SM, McBeth J, van der Veer SN, Dixon WG. Remote symptom monitoring integrated into electronic health records: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020; 27 (11) 1752-1763
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Rudin RS, Perez S, Rodriguez JA. et al. User-centered design of a scalable, electronic health record-integrated remote symptom monitoring intervention for patients with asthma and providers in primary care. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2021; 28 (11) 2433-2444
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Mosnaim GS, Stempel DA, Gonzalez C. et al. The impact of patient self-monitoring via electronic medication monitor and mobile app plus remote clinician feedback on adherence to inhaled corticosteroids: a randomized controlled trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2021; 9 (04) 1586-1594
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Farzandipour M, Nabovati E, Sharif R, Arani MH, Anvari S. Patient self-management of asthma using mobile health applications: a systematic review of the functionalities and effects. Appl Clin Inform 2017; 8 (04) 1068-1081
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 PewResearchCenter. Mobile fact sheet. Demographics of mobile device ownership and adoption in the United States. 2018 . Accessed April 5, 2020 at: http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Greenwood DA, Gee PM, Fatkin KJ, Peeples M. A systematic review of reviews evaluating technology-enabled diabetes self-management education and support. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2017; 11 (05) 1015-1027
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Hui CY, Walton R, McKinstry B, Jackson T, Parker R, Pinnock H. The use of mobile applications to support self-management for people with asthma: a systematic review of controlled studies to identify features associated with clinical effectiveness and adherence. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (03) 619-632
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Broderick J, Devine T, Lemerise AJ, Lier S, Harris L. Designing health literate mobile apps. NAM Perspect 2014; 4 (01)
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Sarkar U, Gourley GI, Lyles CR. et al. Usability of commercially available mobile applications for diverse patients. J Gen Intern Med 2016; 31 (12) 1417-1426
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Amagai S, Pila S, Kaat AJ, Nowinski CJ, Gershon RC. Challenges in participant engagement and retention using mobile health apps: literature review. J Med Internet Res 2022; 24 (04) e35120
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Chan YY, Wang P, Rogers L. et al. The Asthma Mobile Health Study, a large-scale clinical observational study using ResearchKit. Nat Biotechnol 2017; 35 (04) 354-362
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Rocque GB, Dent DN, Ingram SA. et al. Adaptation of remote symptom monitoring using electronic patient-reported outcomes for implementation in real-world settings. JCO Oncol Pract 2022; 18 (12) e1943-e1952
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG. et al. Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34 (06) 557-565
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Rudin RS, Fanta CH, Predmore Z. et al. Core components for a clinically integrated mHealth app for asthma symptom monitoring. Appl Clin Inform 2017; 8 (04) 1031-1043
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Rudin RS, Fanta CH, Qureshi N. et al. A clinically integrated mHealth app and practice model for collecting patient-reported outcomes between visits for asthma patients: implementation and feasibility. Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10 (05) 783-793
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Papoutsi C. et al. Analysing the role of complexity in explaining the fortunes of technology programmes: empirical application of the NASSS framework. BMC Med 2018; 16 (01) 66
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Papoutsi C. et al. Beyond adoption: a new framework for theorizing and evaluating nonadoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health and care technologies. J Med Internet Res 2017; 19 (11) e367
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Plombon S, SRudin R, Sulca Flores J. et al. Assessing equitable recruitment in a digital health trial for asthma. Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14 (04) 620-631
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 CDC. AsthmaStats: uncontrolled asthma among adults, 2016. CDC. 2019 . Accessed April 10, 2021 at: https://www.cdc.gov/asthma/asthma_stats/uncontrolled-asthma-adults.htm
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Fletcher MJ, Tsiligianni I, Kocks JWH. et al. Improving primary care management of asthma: do we know what really works?. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med 2020; 30 (01) 29
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Asthma prevalence. Accessed February 11, 2021 at: https://www.cdc.gov/asthma/data-visualizations/prevalence.htm
    PubMed
  • 38 Song HJ, Blake KV, Wilson DL, Winterstein AG, Park H. Medical costs and productivity loss due to mild, moderate, and severe asthma in the United States. J Asthma Allergy 2020; 13: 545-555
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program, Third Expert Panel on the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma Expert Panel Report 3: Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (US); 2007 . Accessed April 11, 2021 at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7232/
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Lang DM. New asthma guidelines emphasize control, regular monitoring. Cleve Clin J Med 2008; 75 (09) 641-653
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Cloutier MM, Baptist AP, Blake KV. et al; Expert Panel Working Group of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) administered and coordinated National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee (NAEPPCC). 2020 focused updates to the asthma management guidelines: a report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2020; 146 (06) 1217-1270
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Yıldız F. ASIT Study Group. Factors influencing asthma control: results of a real-life prospective observational asthma inhaler treatment (ASIT) study. J Asthma Allergy 2013; 6: 93-101
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Israel E, Cardet JC, Carroll JK. et al. Reliever-triggered inhaled glucocorticoid in Black and Latinx adults with asthma. N Engl J Med 2022; 386 (16) 1505-1518
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Mosnaim G, Safioti G, Brown R. et al. Digital health technology in asthma: a comprehensive scoping review. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2021; 9 (06) 2377-2398
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Hodkinson A, Bower P, Grigoroglou C. et al. Self-management interventions to reduce healthcare use and improve quality of life among patients with asthma: systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ 2020; 370: m2521
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Pinnock H. Supported self-management for asthma. Breathe (Sheff) 2015; 11 (02) 98-109
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Miles C, Arden-Close E, Thomas M. et al. Barriers and facilitators of effective self-management in asthma: systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient and healthcare professional views. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med 2017; 27 (01) 57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Lara M, Edelen MO, Eberhart NK, Stucky BD, Sherbourne CD. Development and validation of the RAND Asthma Control Measure. Eur Respir J 2014; 44 (05) 1243-1252
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Rudin RS, Qureshi N, Foer D, Dalal AK, Edelen MO. Toward an asthma patient-reported outcome measure for use in digital remote monitoring. J Asthma 2022; 59 (08) 1697-1702
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (02) 377-381
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Hennink M, Kaiser BN. Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: a systematic review of empirical tests. Soc Sci Med 2022; 292: 114523
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research—technical assistance for users of the CFIR framework. Accessed October 24, 2023 at: https://cfirguide.org/
    PubMed
  • 53 Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005; 15 (09) 1277-1288
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Richardson S, Lawrence K, Schoenthaler AM, Mann D. A framework for digital health equity. NPJ Digit Med 2022; 5 (01) 119
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Lyles CR, Wachter RM, Sarkar U. Focusing on digital health equity. JAMA 2021; 326 (18) 1795-1796
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 Localio AM, Klusaritz H, Morales KH, Ruggieri DG, Han X, Apter AJ. Primary language and the electronic health record patient portal: barriers to use among Spanish-speaking adults with asthma. J Asthma 2022; 59 (10) 2081-2090
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 57 Vorisek CN, Lehne M, Klopfenstein SAI. et al. Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) for interoperability in health research: systematic review. JMIR Med Inform 2022; 10 (07) e35724
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Leigh S, Ashall-Payne L. The role of health-care providers in mHealth adoption. Lancet Digit Health 2019; 1 (02) e58-e59
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Marcano Belisario JS, Huckvale K, Greenfield G, Car J, Gunn LH. Smartphone and tablet self management apps for asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 2013 (11) CD010013
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 60 van Gaalen JL, Beerthuizen T, van der Meer V. et al; SMASHING Study Group. Long-term outcomes of internet-based self-management support in adults with asthma: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (09) e188
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 61 Buist AS, Vollmer WM, Wilson SR, Frazier EA, Hayward AD. A randomized clinical trial of peak flow versus symptom monitoring in older adults with asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006; 174 (10) 1077-1087
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 62 Merchant RK, Inamdar R, Quade RC. effectiveness of population health management using the propeller health asthma platform: a randomized clinical trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2016; 4 (03) 455-463
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 63 Merchant R, Szefler SJ, Bender BG. et al. Impact of a digital health intervention on asthma resource utilization. World Allergy Organ J 2018; 11 (01) 28
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 64 Silberman J, Sarlati S, Harris B. et al. A digital approach to asthma self-management in adults: protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials 2022; 122: 106902
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 65 Rudin RS, Friedberg MW, Solomon DH. In the COVID-19 era, and beyond, symptom monitoring should be a universal health care function. Health Affairs. Health Affairs Blog.
    Crossref