21
Mobile Technology and Mental Health, Manchester 11/09/2013 User requirements for smartphone applications NIHR MindTech Healthcare Technology Co-operative Dr. Michael Craven – Senior Research Fellow

User requirements for smartphone apps

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The importance of considering user requirements when designing mobile apps for mental healthcare. A presentation by Dr Mike Craven of NIHR MindTech www.mindtech.org.uk

Citation preview

Page 1: User requirements for smartphone apps

Mobile Technology and Mental Health, Manchester 11/09/2013

User requirements for smartphone applicationsNIHR MindTech Healthcare Technology Co-operative

Dr. Michael Craven – Senior Research Fellow

Page 2: User requirements for smartphone apps

University of Nottingham Innovation Park Institute of Mental Health

MindTech NIHR HTC in Mental health & neurodevelopmental disordersSince January 2013. Based in Nottingham.Official launch 11th November 2013, London

2

Page 3: User requirements for smartphone apps

3

Clinical Landscape

• Mood Disorders– Unipolar depression– Bipolar depression

• Neurodevelopmental disorder– Autism spectrum disorder (ASD)– Tourette syndrome– Attention Deficit Hyperactivity

Disorder (ADHD)

• Dementia14.0

7.0

6.9

5.4

5.0

4.9

3.4

3.0

2.0

1.3

1.2

1.0

0.9

0.7

0.4

1.0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Anxiety disorders

Insomnia

Unipolar depression

Dementia

ADHD

Somatoform disorders

Alcohol dependence

Conduct disorder

PTSD

Personality dis.

Psychotic disorder

Cannabis dependence

Eating disorder

OCD

opiate dependence

Mental retardation

Wittchen et al. 2011 European

Neuropsychopharmacology

Current prevalence of mental health disorders in Europe

Page 4: User requirements for smartphone apps

Research Strategy

• Technology Innovation Pipeline

• High quality collaborative projects

• User-led design

• New partnerships

• National resource

• Transformation of mental health care and services

Page 5: User requirements for smartphone apps

Bringing Partners Together

1: Institute of Mental Health2: Technology Transfer Office

Academics

Patients & Carers Clinicians

SMEs

University

NHS

Industry

HTC

IMH1 Medilink

TTO2

ADDISSTourettes Action

Computer Science

Nottinghamshire Healthcare Trust

Biomedical Engineering

Business School

BuddyApp

Qbtech Ltd

Buzz3D Ltd

Red Embedded Ltd

Page 6: User requirements for smartphone apps

Text messaging app to support therapy

Diary: SMS or web

Analysis tool Goal reminders

Appointment prompts

Page 7: User requirements for smartphone apps

7

QbTest: Objective Assessment of ADHD

• Computerised assessment of attention and activity

• Supports clinical decision making

• Provides patients with objective reports on their condition

Page 8: User requirements for smartphone apps

ADHD measurement App

8

• QbTest via smartphone application– link with on-going work aimed at assessing

capacity of QbTest to inform clinical decision making

• Specification:– 1. continuous performance test delivered via a

mobile phone app• provides measurement of attention and impulsivity

– 2. in-built accelerometer and gyroscope to assess levels of activity

• continuously• during specific portions of the day• while performing the cognitive task

Page 9: User requirements for smartphone apps

A few new mental health Apps

• My Journey App – Early Intervention in Psychosis Service for 14 - 35 year olds.

Surrey & Borders Partnership NHSFTGraded self-assessment, mood management tips, emergency contacts, information

• Actissist – personalised CBT treatment for early stage psychosis. University of Manchester

• Doc Ready – checklist for patient/GP communication. Social Spider and others.

• CANTABmobile – Mobile app for memory assessment using Paired Associates Learning test. Cambridge Cognition Ltd.

9

Page 10: User requirements for smartphone apps

10

Earlier self-reporting App case studies

Craven, M. P., Selvarajah, K., Miles, R., Schnädelbach, H., Massey, A., Vedhara, K., Raine-Fenning, N., Crowe, J. User requirements for the development of Smartphone self-reporting applications in healthcare, in Kurosu, M (Ed.): Human-Computer Interaction, Part II, HCII 2013, LNCS 8005, 36-45, 2013.

Page 11: User requirements for smartphone apps

The problem of user elicitation

11

Perceptions• Limited involvement of health professional involvement during App development

(Rosser et al. J. Telemed Telecare, 2011 - Pain Apps survey) • Lack of end user involvement in the App design process (McCurdie et al. AAMI Horizons

2012)• Little good quality evidence for mHealth interventions used by ‘lay people’. Text

messaging services shown to increase adherence to anti-retroviral medication in low cost setting, increase smoking cessation in high cost setting (Free et al. PLOS Medicine, 2013)

Demands• Regulatory (for ‘medical device’ Apps) e.g. HE75, IEC 62366:2007 - Medical devices --

Application of usability• Patient Public Involvement – imperative for NIHR research• Implementation science (Brooks et al. 2011 – ‘conducive’ & ‘impeding’ conditions for

innovation in mental health services)• Ethical (Wenze & Miller 2010 - ecological momentary assessment in mood disorders

research)

Page 12: User requirements for smartphone apps

Ethical issues with Apps

• Security – data storage and communication. Apps vs. text messaging & email (also a regulatory issue)

• Privacy - What do patients/participants expect or imagine might happen with their data e.g. a trained professional monitoring it and acting upon it.

• Sensitive information - maybe better revealed face-to-face, in a group situation …?

• Burden - what frequency of data collection is acceptable?• Impact on clinical care - how to respond to results of data collection: do

nothing, give advice, treat as an emergency?• Impact on health – stress, being reminded could cause exacerbation,

constant reminder of condition?• Social – effect on family, carers etc.

12

Page 13: User requirements for smartphone apps

Case study 1 – IVF Stress App - design brief

13Ref: Quirin, M., Kazan, M., Kuhl, S.: When nonsense sounds happy or helpless: The implicit positive and negative affect test (IPANAT). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 3, 500–516 (2009)

Page 14: User requirements for smartphone apps

Case study 1 – phone audit for IVF Stress App

14

• 10 questions (76 users):– What type/model of mobile phone do you

have? – Is your mobile phone a smart phone?– Which air time provider are you with?– Is the phone on pay as you go or on

contract?– Do you use email or internet access on your

phone?– Is internet coverage included in your

contract?– Do you use an alarm clock function?– Are you familiar with the use of ‘Apps’ on

your phone?– How regularly do you use an ‘App’ on your

phone?– If you were to be asked to report your

distress levels throughout your treatment which of the following methods would you prefer?

Page 15: User requirements for smartphone apps

Example 1 – phone audit

15

IVF stress self-reporting App study: Craven MP et al. (2013) User requirements for the development of Smartphone self-reporting applications in healthcare, in Kurosu, M (Ed.): Human-Computer Interaction, Part II, HCII 2013, LNCS 8005, 36-45

Phones & functions Yes %

Frequencyof App use %

Communication preference %

Is your mobile phone a smart phone?

75 Every day 53 App 58

Do you use email or internet access on your phone?

80 Weekly 17 Text message 30

Is internet coverage included in your contract?

82 Monthly 4 Telephone conversation 8

Do you use an alarm clock function? 92 Not at all 26 (Paper)

Questionnaire 1

Are you familiar with the use of ‘Apps’ on your phone?

80 Other (including email) 3

Page 16: User requirements for smartphone apps

Case study 2 – mild asthma study

16

• Week 1 – diary only • Week 2 – diary + physiological measures

Each weekday evening: • complete diary entry

on smartphone (questionnaire modified from Juniper et al. 1992)

Each weekday morning & evening: • Take 3 PEF measurements and enter data• Record 5 mins of pulse oximeter data

Each weekday evening: complete diary entry

Page 17: User requirements for smartphone apps

Case study 2 – mild asthma – diary adherence

Participant Days with diary entries, week 1 (of 5)

Days with diary entries, week 2 (of 5)

Days with diary entries, total (of 10)

Days with full diary data (of 10)

1 5 3 8 6

2 3 0 3 3

3 1 1 2 2

4 2 2 4 3

5 4 5 9 8

6 1 5 6 4

7 4 1 5 4

8 2 0 2 2

9 3 3 6 4

10 4 4 8 4

11 2 1 3 3

Average (%) 56 45 51 39

17

Page 18: User requirements for smartphone apps

Case study 2 – mild asthma – physiological data adherence

Participant Mornings with oximeter data (of 5)

Afternoons with oximeter data (of 5)

Days with some phys. data entry, total

(of 10)

Days with full phys. data (of 10)

1 4 4 5 1

2 0 0 0 0

3 2 2 5 2

4 3 4 4 1

5 4 5 5 4

6 3 4 5 3

7 4 3 5 0

8 2 2 2 0

9 3 3 4 1

10 1 1 5 0

11 3 3 4 1

Average (%) 53 56 80 24

18

Page 19: User requirements for smartphone apps

Case study 2 – mild asthma - user experience (results)Mild asthma self-reporting App study (with BlueTooth pulse oximeter device)

• 5/11 participants - technology ‘nice’ or ‘easy to use’. – 2 ‘interesting’– 6 minor technical problem (internet/Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, battery)– 1 not confident data upload succeeded– 1 ‘sometimes a bit of a hassle … overkill for mild asthma’

• 5/11 participants - no effect on lifestyle or ‘got used to it’ – 1 more cautious about remembering inhaler– 1 needed to plan when going out– 1 interference with daily activities– 2 difficulty or annoyance scheduling the recordings correctly– 1 inconvenience of sitting down to take measurements

• 11/11 - no effect of technology on condition– 1 reported exacerbation during the study.

• 7/11 - more aware of condition whilst taking part. – 2 ‘a good thing’. – 1 ‘thinking about a cough exacerbates it’.

19

Mild asthma self-reporting App study: Craven MP et al. (2013) User requirements for the development of Smartphone self-reporting applications in healthcare, in Kurosu, M (Ed.): Human-Computer Interaction, Part II, HCII 2013, LNCS 8005, 36-45

Page 20: User requirements for smartphone apps

Towards a protocol

• Conduct a phone audit before commencing a research study – Discover range of prior experiences & preferences for phone functions amongst participants (e.g. alarm

clock)– Detect potential for conflict between normal daily use & research study use of phone (since functions

may mix or conflict)

• Investigate design tolerance to real-world phone use amongst user group– Not keeping devices turned on or charged up – Effect of missing or ignoring prompts

• Ensure secure collection and storage of data – Pre-empt ethical approval issues

• Determine patient burden and adherence – Frequency of self-monitoring prompts– Pilot studies aimed at measuring adherence– Could more passive monitoring be preferable?

Early stage user involvement and/or a participatory design process helps reveal needs which may not initially be apparent

20

Page 21: User requirements for smartphone apps

21

MindTech contacts:

Principal InvestigatorProf Chris Hollis [email protected]

Technology Theme Lead:Prof John Crowe [email protected]

Senior Research Fellow (Technology)Dr Michael Craven [email protected]

NIHR MindTech Healthcare Technology Co-operative

Thank you for listening!