Zusammenfassung
Digital Public Health verspricht neben einer umfänglicheren medizinischen Versorgung auch eine individuelle Gesundheitsförderung und Unterstützung für positive Veränderungen im Lebensstil. Mobilen digitalen Gesundheitsgeräten und -diensten, auch Mobile Health (M-Health) genannt, kommt dabei eine Schlüsselrolle zu. Sie umfassen gesundheitsspezifische Hardware- und Softwareapplikationen wie Smartphone-Apps und Wearables zur Aufzeichnung, Überwachung und Auswertung spezifischer Gesundheitsparameter. Obwohl es wissenschaftliche Nachweise für die Effektivität einzelner Anwendungen gibt, bleibt die praktische Nutzung meist von verhältnismäßig kurzer Dauer. Um eine höhere Akzeptanz- und Nutzungsrate zu erreichen, wird Evidenz benötigt, die stärker an der Praxis orientiert ist.
Der vorliegende Beitrag erläutert, wie mittels partizipatorischer Entwicklungsansätze und unter Berücksichtigung individueller Bedürfnisse und Präferenzen der Nutzer*innen die Qualität und Wirksamkeit von M‑Health-Angeboten verbessert werden können. Die soziodemografischen Merkmale der Zielgruppe sowie individuelle, soziale, sprachliche und kulturelle Barrieren sollten Beachtung finden ebenso Wünsche der Nutzer*innen z. B. nach Personalisierbarkeit, Übermittlung von Informationen in Echtzeit und Transparenz in Hinblick auf Datenschutz. Beim Co-Design-Ansatz werden die Nutzer*innen daher direkt in die Produktkonzeption einbezogen. Die Studienlage hierzu ist aber noch begrenzt und es fehlt an methodischer Systematik.
Um die Nutzung von M‑Health-Angeboten zukünftig zu erhöhen, sollten Partizipationsprozesse systematisiert werden. Zudem sollten Konzepte für Klassifizierung und Zertifizierung sowie Verfahren zur Bekanntmachung von wirksamen Anwendungen entwickelt werden.
Abstract
Digital public health promises not only more comprehensive medical care, but also individual health promotion and support for positive lifestyle changes. Mobile digital health devices and services, also called mobile health (mHealth), play a key role in this. They include health-specific hardware and software applications such as smartphone apps and wearable technology for recording, monitoring, and evaluating specific health parameters. Although there is scientific evidence for the effectiveness of individual applications, most often applications are used for a relatively short amount of time. In order to achieve a higher acceptance and utilization rate, evidence is needed that is more practice oriented.
This paper explains how participatory development approaches take into account the individual needs and preferences of users and can improve the quality and effectiveness of mHealth services. The sociodemographic characteristics of the target group as well as individual, social, linguistic, and cultural barriers should be considered. The wishes of users, for example personalization, transmission of real-time information, and transparency in terms of privacy should also be considered. In the co-design approach, users are therefore included directly in the product concept. However, the study situation is still limited and there are no methodical approaches.
In order to increase the use of mHealth services in the future, participation processes should be systematized. In addition, a framework for classification and certification as well as procedures for promoting effective applications should be developed.
Literatur
Shaw T, Mcgregor D, Brunner M, Keep M, Janssen A, Barnet S (2017) What is ehealth (6)? development of a conceptual model for ehealth: qualitative study with key informants. J Med Internet Res 19:e324
Ametsreiter H (2019) Smartphone-Markt: Konjunktur und Trends. Bitkom, Berlin (Bitkom-Präsidium (ed))
Iribarren SJ, Cato K, Falzon L, Stone PW (2017) What is the economic evidence for mHealth? A systematic review of economic evaluations of mHealth solutions. PLoS ONE 12:e170581
IQVIA (Institute for Human Data Science) (2017) The growing value of digital health. https://www.iqvia.com/insights/the-iqvia-institute/reports/the-growing-value-of-digital-health
Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ (2007) Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Serv Res 42:1758–1772
Baretta D, Sartori F, Greco A, D’addario M, Melen R, Steca P (2019) Improving physical activity mhealth interventions: development of a computational model of self-efficacy theory to define adaptive goals for exercise promotion. Adv Human Comput Interact 2019:1–11
Song T, Qian S, Yu P (2019) Mobile health interventions for self-control of unhealthy alcohol use: systematic review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 7:e10899
Rivera J, Mcpherson A, Hamilton J et al (2016) Mobile Apps for weight management: a scoping review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 4:e87
Whittaker R, Mcrobbie H, Bullen C, Rodgers A, Gu Y (2016) Mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006611.pub4
Ventola LC (2014) Mobile devices and Apps for health care professionals: uses and benefits. Pharm Ther 39:356–364
Villinger K, Wahl DR, Boeing H, Schupp HT, Renner B (2019) The effectiveness of app-based mobile interventions on nutrition behaviours and nutrition-related health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12903
Schoeppe S, Alley S, Van Lippevelde W et al (2016) Efficacy of interventions that use apps to improve diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 13:127
Woldaregay AZ, Issom DZ, Henriksen A et al (2018) Motivational factors for user engagement with mhealth Apps. Stud Health Technol Inform 249:151–157
Anderson K, Burford O, Emmerton L (2016) Mobile Health Apps to Facilitate Self-Care: A Qualitative Study of User Experiences. PLoS ONE 11(5):e0156164. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156164
Leung L, Chen C (2019) E‑health/m-health adoption and lifestyle improvements: exploring the roles of technology readiness, the expectation-confirmation model, and health-related information activities. Telecomm Policy 43:563–575
Eyles H, Jull A, Dobson R et al (2016) Co-design of mhealth delivered interventions: a systematic review to assess key methods and processes. Curr Nutr Rep 5:160–167
Peiris D, Miranda JJ, Mohr DC (2018) Going beyond killer apps: building a better mHealth evidence base. BMJ Glob Health 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000676
Pham Q, Wiljer D, Cafazzo JA (2016) Beyond the randomized controlled trial: a review of alternatives in mhealth clinical trial methods. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 4:e107
Baker TB, Piper ME, Stein JH et al (2016) Effects of nicotine patch vs varenicline vs combination nicotine replacement therapy on smoking cessation at 26 weeks: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 315:371–379
Stead LF, Hartmann-Boyce J, Perera R, Lancaster T (2013) Telephone counselling for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002850.pub3:CD002850
Free C, Phillips G, Galli L et al (2013) The effectiveness of mobile-health technology-based health behaviour change or disease management interventions for health care consumers: a systematic review. PLoS Med 10:e1001362
Kaltheuner M, Drossel D, Heinemann L (2016) Diadigital support for patients and diabetologists when using Apps. Diabetologe 12:538–549
Bittner J, Thranberend T (2019) AppQ: ein Gütekriterien-Kernset für mehr Qualitätstransparenz bei Gesundheits-Apps. https://blog.der-digitale-patient.de/appq-guetekriterien-kernset-gesundheits-apps/. Zugegriffen: 5. Sept. 2019 (Bertelsman Stiftung)
Druce KL, Dixon WG, Mcbeth J (2019) Maximizing engagement in mobile health studies: lessons learned and future directions. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 45:159–172
Crane D, Garnett C, Brown J, West R, Michie S (2015) Behavior change techniques in popular alcohol reduction apps: content analysis. J Med Internet Res 17:e118
Carroll JK, Moorhead A, Bond R, Leblanc WG, Petrella RJ, Fiscella K (2017) Who uses mobile phone health Apps and does use matter? A secondary data analytics approach. J Med Internet Res 19:e125
Elavsky S, Smahel D, Machackova H (2017) Who are mobile app users from healthy lifestyle websites? Analysis of patterns of app use and user characteristics. Transl Behav Med 7:891–901
Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, New York
König LM, Sproesser G, Schupp HT, Renner B (2018) Describing the process of adopting nutrition and fitness Apps: behavior stage model approach. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 6(3). https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.8261
Viswanath K, Mccloud R, Minsky S et al (2013) Internet use, browsing, and the urban poor: implications for cancer control. JNCI Monogr 2013:199–205
Zhao Y, Ni Q, Zhou R (2018) What factors influence the mobile health service adoption? A meta-analysis and the moderating role of age. Int J Inf Manage 43:342–350
Hoque R, Sorwar G (2017) Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mhealth by the elderly: an extension of the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform 101:75–84
Urban M (2017) “This really takes it out of you!” The senses and emotions in digital health practices of the elderly. Digit Health 3:2055207617701778
Perski O, Blandford A, West R, Michie S (2016) Conceptualising engagement with digital behaviour change interventions: a systematic review using principles from critical interpretive synthesis. Behav Med Pract Policy Res 7:254–267
Lee E, Han S, Jo SH (2017) Consumer choice of on-demand mHealth app services: context and contents values using structural equation modeling. Int J Med Inform 97:229–238
Bhattacherjee A (2001) Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q 25(3). https://doi.org/10.2307/3250921
Lazar A, Koehler C, Tanenbaum J, Nguyen DH (2015) Why we use and abandon smart devices. Proceedings of the 2015 Acm International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (Ubicomp 2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2804288:635–646
Meyer J, Wasmann M, Heuten W, El Ali A, Boll SCJ (2017) Identification and classification of usage patterns in long-term activity tracking. Proceedings of the 2017 Acm Sigchi Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Chi’17). https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025690:667–678
Anderson K, Burford O, Emmerton L (2016) Mobile health Apps to facilitate self-care: a qualitative study of user experiences. PLoS ONE 11:e156164
Lipschitz J, Miller CJ, Hogan TP et al (2019) Adoption of mobile Apps for depression and anxiety: cross-sectional survey study on patient interest and barriers to engagement. JMIR Ment Health 6:e11334
Nahum-Shani I, Smith SN, Spring BJ et al (2016) Just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAis) in mobile health: key components and design principles for ongoing health behavior support. Ann Behav Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-016-9830-8
Burns MN, Begale M, Duffecy J et al (2011) Harnessing context sensing to develop a mobile intervention for depression. J Med Internet Res 13:e55
Dennison L, Morrison L, Conway G, Yardley L (2013) Opportunities and challenges for smartphone applications in supporting health behavior change: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res 15:e86
Schlosser D, Campellone T, Kim D et al (2016) Feasibility of PRIME: a cognitive neuroscience-informed mobile app intervention to enhance motivated behavior and improve quality of life in recent onset schizophrenia. JMIR Res Protoc 5:e77
Cho H, Powell D, Pichon A et al (2018) A mobile health intervention for HIV prevention among racially and ethnically diverse young men: usability evaluation. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 6:e11450
DeSmet A, Thompson D, Baranowski T, Palmeira A, Verloigne M, De Bourdeaudhuij I (2016) Is participatory design associated with the effectiveness of serious digital games for healthy lifestyle promotion? A meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res 18(4). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4444
Krishnaswami J, Martinson M, Wakimoto P, Anglemeyer A (2012) Community-engaged interventions on diet, activity, and weight outcomes in U.S. Schools. Am J Prev Med 43:81–91
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Interessenkonflikt
T. Jahnel und B. Schüz geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jahnel, T., Schüz, B. Partizipative Entwicklung von Digital-Public-Health-Anwendungen: Spannungsfeld zwischen Nutzer*innenperspektive und Evidenzbasierung. Bundesgesundheitsbl 63, 153–159 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-019-03082-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-019-03082-x