Actors and intentions in the development process of a mobile phone platform for self-management of hypertension

Abstract

This is an electronic version of an article published in: Agneta Ranerup and Inger Hallberg, Actors and intentions in the development process of a mobile phone platform for self-management of hypertension, 2015, Informatics for Health and Social Care,(40) Abstract AimThe aim of this study was to enhance the knowledge regarding actors and intentions in the development process of a mobile phone platform for self-management of hypertension. MethodsOur research approach was a 14-month longitudinal "real-time ethnography" method of description and analysis. Data were collected through focus groups with patients and providers, patient interviews, and design meetings with researchers and experts. The analysis was informed by the concepts of actors and inscriptions in Actor-Network Theory (ANT). ResultsOur study showed that laypersons, scientific actors, as well as technology itself, might influence development processes of support for self-management of hypertension. The intentions were inscribed into the technology design as well as the models of learning and treatment. ConclusionsThis study highlighted important aspects of how actors and intentions feature in the development of the mobile phone platform to support self-management of hypertension. The study indicated the multifacetedness of the participating actors, including the prominent role of technology. The concrete results of such processes included questions in the self-report system, learning and treatment models.-3 -

Experiences, expectations and challenges of an interactive mobile phone-based system to support self-management of hypertension: patients’ and professionals’ perspectives

“…The interactive mobile phone-based self-management support system (referred to as the system) consists of three main components: 1) a mobile phone platform for the delivery and capture of patient reports of well-being, symptoms, lifestyle, medication intake, side effects, BP, tailored phone-based motivational messages and reminders; 2) a device for measuring BP and 3) a web-based feedback system showing graphs of the self-reported data. To be found elsewhere are detailed descriptions of the design, development and validation process; 18 , 20 , 22 , 23 the patients’ more immediate experiences of using the technology 21 and an analysis of the effect of BP after 8 weeks of using the self-management system. 24 …”

The development of consumer mHealth interventions for chronic condition self-management: A systematic review.

“…Selfmanagement guidelines may not be appropriate and therefore not followed in the real world, which may be perceived as poor adherence [14]. For example lack of symptoms was uncovered to be a reason patients didn't take medicine [11].…”

“…Secondly, the intentions of participants involved may fundamentally vary from the research project aims. This is to be considered if we believe the intentions of the members of the development team influence the technology and development process itself, as suggested by Ranerup and Hallberg [14]. To engage with and prioritise the needs of the end-user with complete respect to the patient-centred model, development teams require ongoing management of the interactions between design team members.…”

“…To engage with and prioritise the needs of the end-user with complete respect to the patient-centred model, development teams require ongoing management of the interactions between design team members. Significantly, management of the relationship between lay and evidence-based knowledge is necessary to appropriately facilitate the formation of a design that fits the multidimensional reality of everyday life of the enduser [14]. Importantly, clarity of research questions regarding for whom intervention development is for, is necessary from the project's inception.…”

“…It is suggested when the design 'stems' from patients themselves, prioritising the needs for the self-management is established from the outset, with the ongoing healthcare professional input regarding their clinical relevance [13]. The combination of actual experiences and perceived problems of patients and healthcare professionals [25], and the balance of lay knowledge and scientific knowledge [14], are two challenges development teams face in improving mHealth design. Effectively collaborating among stakeholders with differing interests is a consistent research finding in an existing literature review by Matthew-Maich et al [27].…”