Research on health technologies traditionally report clinical measures. However, with mHealth and online resources for diabetes self-management, individuals are calling for more, diverse evidence. We compare two reviews to determine to what extent mHealth and online intervention studies address patient-reported needs.
A systematic review (Review 1) searched for reported outcomes of mHealth and online intervention studies (PROSPERO registration: CRD42018115246). A literature review (Review 2) searched for patient-reported needs for diabetes self-management. Both covered articles published between 2015 and 2019. For ease of comparison, the co-authors categorized the results.
Reviews 1 and 2 resulted in n=31 and n=21 articles, respectively. Main categories of reported outcomes were: support from/access to resources, usability/suitability, patient empowerment/engagement, clinical outcomes, and data protection. Main needs categories were: support/access to services, information, coping and patient engagement/empowerment, and technology. Thus, the research outcomes and patient needs were in general very different. For example, under the category support/access to services, reported intervention outcomes included peers, coordinated-care services and relevant information. However, specific patient-reported needs included resources and services to self-management activities, e.g. gyms, feedback on self-management performance and reminders.
A reason for these differences is that research interventions occur within closed and controllable systems, whereas patient-reported needs result from experience in the real-world, with a multitude of resources. Future interventions can address this by include more contextual information, e.g. about participants’ access to resources, as baseline measures. In doing so, we can provide evidence of the relationship that these resources have on the success of the intervention.