Investigating When, Which, and Why Users Stop Using a Digital Health Intervention to Promote an Active Lifestyle: Secondary Analysis With A Focus on Health Action Process Approach–Based Psychological Determinants

Abstract

Background Digital health interventions have gained momentum to change health behaviors such as physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB). Although these interventions show promising results in terms of behavior change, they still suffer from high attrition rates, resulting in a lower potential and accessibility. To reduce attrition rates in the future, there is a need to investigate the reasons why individuals stop using the interventions. Certain demographic variables have already been related to attrition; however, the role of psychological determinants of behavior change as predictors of attrition has not yet been fully explored. Objective The aim of this study was to examine when, which, and why users stopped using a digital health intervention. In particular, we aimed to investigate whether psychological determinants of behavior change were predictors for attrition. Methods The sample consisted of 473 healthy adults who participated in the intervention MyPlan 2.0 to promote PA or reduce SB. The intervention was developed using the health action process approach (HAPA) model, which describes psychological determinants that guide individuals in changing their behavior. If participants stopped with the intervention, a questionnaire with 8 question concerning attrition was sent by email. To analyze when users stopped using the intervention, descriptive statistics were used per part of the intervention (including pre- and posttest measurements and the 5 website sessions). To analyze which users stopped using the intervention, demographic variables, behavioral status, and HAPA-based psychological determinants at pretest measurement were investigated as potential predictors of attrition using logistic regression models. To analyze why users stopped using the intervention, descriptive statistics of scores to the attrition-related questionnaire were used. Results The study demonstrated that 47.9% (227/473) of participants stopped using the intervention, and drop out occurred mainly in the beginning of the intervention. The results seem to indicate that gender and participant scores on the psychological determinants action planning, coping planning, and self-monitoring were predictors of first session, third session, or whole intervention completion. The most endorsed reasons to stop using the intervention were the time-consuming nature of questionnaires (55%), not having time (50%), dissatisfaction with the content of the intervention (41%), technical problems (39%), already meeting the guidelines for PA/SB (31%), and, to a lesser extent, the experience of medical/emotional problems (16%). Conclusions This study provides some directions for future studies. To decrease attrition, it will be important to personalize interventions on different levels, questionnaires (either for research purposes or tailoring) should be kept to a minimum especially in the beginning of interventions by, for example, using objective monitoring devices, and technical aspects of digital health interventions should be thoroughly tested in advance. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03274271; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03274271 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.1186/s13063-019-3456-7

Nonusage Attrition of Adolescents in an mHealth Promotion Intervention and the Role of Socioeconomic Status: Secondary Analysis of a 2-Arm Cluster-Controlled Trial

“…Consistent with previous research, high attrition rates occurred in the very early phases of the intervention [ 18 , 26 , 68 , 75 , 76 ]: 30.1% (56/186) had only opened the app on the installation day (ie, day 1), and almost half of the adolescents (82/186, 44.1%) stopped using the app in the first week. It seems like many adolescents (approximately one-third; 56/186, 30.1%) had not given the intervention a chance.…”

“…A total of 14 items were formulated based on the literature [ 18 , 66 - 68 ] and discussions with the research team. Participants indicated whether they agreed with the reason for attrition on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.…”

Towards more personalized digital health interventions: impact of emotions and physical complaints on goals, action and coping plans to promote physical activity

“…daily cycles of setting goals, action and coping plans) already proved to be effective (Degroote et ). However, another important reason might be due to the fact that support to guide participants through the behavioural processes of goal setting, action and coping planning were abstract, generic and not tailored to the individual in MyPlan and MyDayPlan (Schroé et al 2022b). In an attempt to tackle this, participants were considered as their own expert in terms of setting goals and making plans: they were instructed to specify the content themselves, allowing to take their own personal situation into account.…”

Towards more personalized digital health interventions: a clustering method of action and coping plans to promote physical activity

“…Despite the effectiveness of action and coping plans in digital health interventions to change behaviour [14][15][16], attrition rates remain high [14,17,18]. This reduces the impact of these interventions.…”