ReachCare Mobile Apps for Patients Experiencing Suicidality in the Emergency Department: Development and Usability Testing Using Mixed Methods

Abstract

Background Many individuals with suicide risk present to acute care settings such as emergency departments (EDs). However, staffing and time constraints mean that many EDs are not well equipped to deliver evidence-based interventions for patients experiencing suicidality. An existing intervention initiated in the ED for patients with suicide risk (Emergency Department Safety Assessment and Follow-up Evaluation [ED-SAFE]) has been found to be effective but faces trenchant barriers for widespread adoption. Objective On the basis of the ED-SAFE intervention, we aimed to develop 2 apps for patients with suicide risk: a web app guiding patients through safety planning in the ED (ED app) and a smartphone app providing patients components of the ED-SAFE program on their phones after discharge (patient app). We then tested the usability of these apps with patients presenting to the ED with suicide risk. Methods Using a user-centered design framework, we first developed user personas to explore the needs and characteristics of patients who are at risk for suicide using inputs from clinicians (n=3) and suicidologists (n=4). Next, we validated these personas during interviews with individuals with lived experience of suicidality (n=6) and used them to inform our application designs. We field-tested the apps with ED patients presenting with suicide risk (n=14) in 2 iterative cycles to assess their usability and engagement using a mixed methods approach. We also rated the quality and fidelity of the safety plans created. Results We developed 2 interoperable and complementary apps. The first is a web app designed for use on a tablet device during ED admission that guides the patient by creating a safety plan using a chatbot-style interface. The second is a smartphone app for use after discharge and allows the patient to view, edit, and share their completed safety plan; access self-care education, helplines, and behavioral health referrals; and track follow-up appointments with the study clinician. The initial prototype usability testing (n=9) demonstrated satisfactory scores (ED app System Usability Scale [SUS], mean 78.6/100, SD 24.1; User Engagement Scale, mean 3.74/5, SD 0.72; patient app SUS, mean 81.7/100, SD 20.1). After refining the apps based on participant feedback, the second cycle testing (n=5) showed improvement (ED app SUS, mean 90.5/100, SD 9.9; User Engagement Scale, mean 4.07/5, SD 0.36; patient app SUS, mean 97.0/100, SD 1.9). The quality ratings for completed safety plans were satisfactory (Safety Planning Intervention Scoring Algorithm-Brief, mean 27.4, SD 3.4). Conclusions By adopting a user-centered approach and creating personas to guide development, we were able to create apps for ED patients with suicide risk and obtain satisfactory usability, engagement, and quality scores. Developing digital health tools based on user-centered design principles that deliver evidence-based intervention components may help overcome trenchant implementation barriers in challenging health care settings.

Co-producing digital mental health interventions: A systematic review

“…Some stakeholders did not have access to mobile phones and could therefore not test the tool. 40 , 46 , 53 In other cases, the expense involved in iterating and creating multiple versions of the app was prohibitive, 51 , 53 , 58 , 66 and technical limitations in incorporating user feedback into app features was also a challenge. 48 , 50 For example, in Berry et al, 66 end users requested multi-media features, such as voice recording features, that were not feasible for the software team to develop due to time and finding constraints, limited resources within the study time frame or the funding of the research grant.…”

“…A common barrier reported in most studies reviewed 40 , 47 , 51 , 54 , 55 , 59 , 61 , 62 was the use of small samples to co-produce, reducing generalisability and influencing the nature of the input received. Several studies further noted the lack of recruiting a diverse sample as a challenge, 39 , 40 , 42 – 45 , 51 , 53 and consequently queried how representative the views were to the wider target audience the DMHI was designed to help.…”

“…A common barrier reported in most studies reviewed 40 , 47 , 51 , 54 , 55 , 59 , 61 , 62 was the use of small samples to co-produce, reducing generalisability and influencing the nature of the input received. Several studies further noted the lack of recruiting a diverse sample as a challenge, 39 , 40 , 42 – 45 , 51 , 53 and consequently queried how representative the views were to the wider target audience the DMHI was designed to help. Studies recognised methods used to recruit influenced the limited diversity of the sample, such as recruiting from services, where individuals may be more help-seeking and/or have a better self-management of their mental health.…”

“…Other studies identified they were not always able to capture the views of all stakeholder groups, including engaging family members due to recruitment and practical issues, limiting experiences across stakeholder groups. 40 …”

“…Co-producing DMHIs with stakeholders facilitated the development of useful, relevant, and acceptable apps that met both the end users’ and researchers’ needs and concerns. 40 , 45 , 51 , 58 , 60 Specifically, Newton and colleagues 51 described how the co-production process resulted in an app that felt relevant and acceptable to both clinicians and service users, showing promise in exposure interventions outside of therapy. Several studies also emphasised the necessity of iterative testing, to identify and incorporate the needs and features identified and prioritised by stakeholders, such as design and content flaws noted in prototypes, in a timely manner.…”