Ethical issues experienced by persons with rheumatoid arthritis in a wearable-enabled physical activity intervention study

Jenny Leese, Siyi Zhu, Anne F Townsend, Catherine L Backman, Laura Nimmon, Linda C Li, Jenny Leese, Siyi Zhu, Anne F Townsend, Catherine L Backman, Laura Nimmon, Linda C Li

Abstract

Introduction: Using wearables to self-monitor physical activity is a promising approach to support arthritis self-management. Little is known, however, about the context in which ethical issues may be experienced when using a wearable in self-management. We used a relational ethics lens to better understand how persons with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) experience their use of a wearable as part of a physical activity counselling intervention study involving a physiotherapist (PT).

Methods: Constructivist grounded theory and a relational ethics lens guided the study design. This conceptual framework drew attention to benefits, downsides and tensions experienced in a context of relational settings (micro and macro) in which participants live. Fourteen initial and eleven follow-up interviews took place with persons with RA in British Columbia, Canada, following participation in a wearable-enabled intervention study.

Results: We created three main categories, exploring how experiences of benefits, downsides and tensions when using the intervention intertwined with shared moral values placed on self-control, trustworthiness, independence and productivity: (1) For some, using a wearable helped to 'do something right' by taking more control over reaching physical activity goals. Some, however, felt ambivalent, believing both there was nothing more they could do and that they had not done enough to reach their goal; (2) Some participants described how sharing wearable data supported and challenged mutual trustworthiness in their relationship with the PT; (3) For some, using a wearable affirmed or challenged their sense of self-respect as an independent and productive person.

Conclusion: Participants in this study reported that using a wearable could support and challenge their arthritis self-management. Constructing moral identity, with qualities of self-control, trustworthiness, independence and productivity, within the relational settings in which participants live, was integral to ethical issues encountered. This study is a key step to advance understanding of ethical issues of using a wearable as an adjunct for engaging in physical activity from a patient's perspective.

Patient or public contribution: Perspectives of persons with arthritis (mostly members of Arthritis Research Canada's Arthritis Patient Advisory Board) were sought to shape the research question and interpretations throughout data analysis.

Keywords: physical activity; relational ethics; rheumatoid arthritis; self-management; wearable technology.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

© 2022 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A summary of relational ethics issues experienced by participants using a Fitbit with a physiotherapist

References

    1. Ottawa Panel . Ottawa Panel evidence‐based clinical practice guidelines for therapeutic exercises in the management of rheumatoid arthritis in adults. Phys Ther. 2004;84(10):934‐972.
    1. Rausch Osthoff AK, Niedermann K, Braun J, et al. 2018 EULAR recommendations for physical activity in people with inflammatory arthritis and osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(9):1251‐1260. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-213585
    1. Metsios GS, Kitas GD. Physical activity, exercise and rheumatoid arthritis: effectiveness, mechanisms and implementation. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2018;32(5):669‐682. 10.1016/j.berh.2019.03.013
    1. Metsios GS, Moe RH, van der Esch M, et al. The effects of exercise on cardiovascular disease risk factors and cardiovascular physiology in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int. 2020;40(3):347‐357. 10.1007/s00296-019-04483-6
    1. Charmaz K. Measuring pursuits, marking self: meaning construction in chronic illness. Int J Qual Stud Health Wellbeing. 2006;1:27‐37. 10.1080/17482620500534488
    1. Tierney M, Fraser A, Kennedy N. Physical activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. J Phys Act Health. 2012;9:1036‐1048. 10.1123/jpah.9.7.1036
    1. Iversen M, Frits M, Heideken J, Cui J, Weinblatt M, Shadick N. Physical activity and correlates of physical activity participation over three years in adults with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2017;60(10):1535‐1545. 10.1002/acr.23156
    1. Pinto AJ, Roschel H, de Sá Pinto AL, et al. Physical inactivity and sedentary behavior: overlooked risk factors in autoimmune rheumatic diseases? Autoimmun Rev. 2017;16(7):667‐674. 10.1016/j.autrev.2017.05.001
    1. Piwek L, Ellis DA, Andrews S, Joinson A. The rise of consumer health wearables: promises and barriers. PLoS Med. 2016;13(2):1001953. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001953
    1. Davergne T, Pallot A, Dechartres A, Fautrel B, Gossec L. Use of wearable activity trackers to improve physical activity behavior in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Arthritis Care Res. 2019;71(6):758‐767. 10.1002/acr.23752
    1. Bravata DM, Smith‐Spangler C, Sundaram V, et al. Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review. JAMA. 2007;298(19):2296‐2304. 10.1001/jama.298.19.2296
    1. Katz P, Margaretten M, Gregorich S, Trupin L. Physical activity to reduce fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care Res. 2018;70(1):1‐10. 10.1002/acr.23230
    1. Brickwood KJ, Watson G, O'Brien J, Williams AD. Consumer‐based wearable activity trackers increase physical activity participation: systematic review and meta‐analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7(4):e11819. 10.2196/11819
    1. Leese J, MacDonald G, Backman CL, Townsend A, Nimmon L, Li LC. Experiences of wearable technology by persons with knee osteoarthritis participating in a physical activity counseling intervention: qualitative study using a relational ethics lens. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021;9(11):e30332. 10.2196/30332
    1. Leese J, Geldmanc J, Zhu S, et al. The perspectives of persons with arthritis on the use of wearable technology to self‐monitor physical activity: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Arthritis Care Res . Published online February 28, 2021. 10.1002/acr.24585
    1. Moore J, Engel J, Prentice D. Relational ethics in everyday practice. Can Oncol Nurs J. 2014;24(1):31‐34. 10.5737/1181912x2413134
    1. Ells C, Hunt MR, Chambers‐Evans J. Relational autonomy as an essential component of patient‐centered care. Int J Fem Approaches Bioeth. 2011;4(2):79‐101. 10.2979/intjfemappbio.4.2.79
    1. Charmaz K. “Discovering” chronic illness: using grounded theory. Soc Sci Med. 1990;30(11):1161‐1172. 10.1016/0277-9536(90)90256-r
    1. Charmaz K. Constructing Grounded Theory. SAGE; 2014.
    1. Bergum V. Relational ethics for health care. In: Dossetor J, ed.Toward a Moral Horizon: Nursing Ethics for Leadership and Practice. Pearson; 2013:127‐142.
    1. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. Oxford University Press; 2009.
    1. Donchin A. Reworking autonomy: toward a feminist perspective. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 1995;4(1):44‐55. 10.1017/S0963180100005636
    1. Baylis F, Kenny NP, Sherwin S. A relational account of public health ethics. Public Health Ethics. 2008;1(3):196‐209. 10.1093/phe/phn025
    1. MacDonald C. Nurse autonomy as relational. Nurs Ethics. 2002;9(2):194‐201. 10.1191/0969733002ne498oa
    1. Entwistle VA, Carter SM, Cribb A, McCaffery K. Supporting patient autonomy: the importance of clinician‐patient relationships. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(7):741‐745. 10.1007/s11606-010-1292-2
    1. Austin W. Relational ethics in forensic psychiatric settings. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2001;39(9):12‐17.
    1. Kunyk D, Austin W. Nursing under the influence: a relational ethics perspective. Nurs Ethics. 2011;19(3):380‐389. 10.1177/0969733011406767
    1. Sellevold GS, Egede‐Nissen V, Jakobsen R, Sørlie V. Quality care for persons experiencing dementia: the significance of relational ethics. Nurs Ethics. 2013;20(3):263‐272. 10.1177/0969733012462050
    1. Sherwin S, Winsby M. A relational perspective on autonomy for older adults residing in nursing homes: a relational perspective on autonomy for older adults. Health Expect. 2011;14(2):182‐190. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00638.x
    1. Entwistle VA. Hurtful comments are harmful comments: respectful communication is not just an optional extra in healthcare. Health Expect. 2008;11(4):319‐320. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00527.x
    1. Townsend A, Leese J, Adam P, et al. eHealth, participatory medicine, and ethical care: a focus group study of patients' and health care providers' use of health‐related internet information. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(6):e155. 10.2196/jmir.3792
    1. Li LC, Feehan LM, Xie H, et al. Efficacy of a physical activity counseling program with use of a wearable tracker in people with inflammatory arthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care Res. 2020;72(12):1755‐1765. 10.1002/acr.24199
    1. Thomas S, Reading J, Shephard RJ. Revision of the physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR‐Q). Can J Sport Sci. 1992;17(4):338‐345.
    1. Gutnick D, Reims K, Davis C, Gainforth H, Jay M, Cole S. Brief action planning to facilitate behaviour change and support patient self‐management. J Clin Outcomes Manag. 2014;21:17‐29.
    1. Charmaz K. Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE; 2000:509‐535.
    1. Britten N. Qualitative interviews in medical research. Br Med J. 1995;311(6999):251‐253. 10.1136/bmj.311.6999.251
    1. Leese J, Li LC, Nimmon L, Townsend AF, Backman CL. Moving beyond “until saturation was reached”: critically examining how saturation is used and reported in qualitative research. Arthritis Care Res. 2021;73(9):1225‐1227. 10.1002/acr.24600
    1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ‐9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606‐613. 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x
    1. Townsend A, Wyke S, Hunt K. Self‐managing and managing self: practical and moral dilemmas in accounts of living with chronic illness. Chronic Illn. 2006;2(3):185‐194. 10.1177/17423953060020031301
    1. Williams G. Chronic illness and the pursuit of virtue in everyday life. In: Radley A, ed. Worlds of Illness: Biographical and Cultural Perspectives on Health and Disease. Routledge; 1993:92‐108.
    1. Bury M. Chronic illness as biographical disruption. Sociol Health Illn. 1982;4(2):167‐182. 10.1111/1467-9566.ep11339939
    1. Redman B. Responsibility for control: ethics of patient preparation for self‐management of chronic disease. Bioethics. 2007;21(5):243‐250. 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00550.x
    1. Lyons EJ, Lewis ZH, Mayrsohn BG, Rowland JL. Behavior change techniques implemented in electronic lifestyle activity monitors: a systematic content analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(8):e192. 10.2196/jmir.3469
    1. Barello S, Graffigna G, Vegni E. Patient engagement as an emerging challenge for healthcare services: mapping the literature. Nurs Res Pract. 2012;2012:905934‐905937. 10.1155/2012/905934
    1. Morden A, Jinks C, Ong BN. Rethinking “risk” and self‐management for chronic illness. Soc Theory Health. 2012;10(1):78‐99. 10.1057/sth.2011.20
    1. Swan M. Health 2050: the realization of personalized medicine through crowdsourcing, the quantified self, and the participatory biocitizen. J Pers Med. 2012;2(3):93‐118. 10.3390/jpm2030093
    1. Lupton D. The digitally engaged patient: self‐monitoring and self‐care in the digital health era. Soc Theory Health. 2013;11(3):1‐15.
    1. Redman BK. The ethics of self‐management preparation for chronic illness. Nurs Ethics. 2005;12(4):360‐369. 10.1191/0969733005ne801oa
    1. Crawford R. Healthism and the medicalization of everyday life. Int J Health Serv. 1980;10(3):365‐388. 10.2190/3H2H-3XJN-3KAY-G9NY
    1. Cheek J. Healthism: a new conservatism? Qual Health Res. 2008;18(7):974‐982. 10.1177/1049732308320444
    1. Mechanic D. The functions and limitations of trust in the provision of medical care. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1998;23(4):661‐686. 10.1215/03616878-23-4-661
    1. Cook KS, Kramer RM, Thom DH, Stepanikova I, Mollborn SB, Cooper RM. Trust and distrust in patient‐physician relationships: perceived determinants of high‐ and low‐trust relationships in managed‐care settings. In: Roderick M, Kramer K, Cook S, eds. Trust and Distrust In Organizations. Russell Sage Foundation; 2004:65. 10.7758/9781610443388.7
    1. Calnan M, Rowe R. Trust and health care. Sociol Compass. 2007;1(1):283‐308. 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00007.x
    1. Brennan N, Barnes R, Calnan M, Corrigan O, Dieppe P, Entwistle V. Trust in the health‐care provider―patient relationship: a systematic mapping review of the evidence base. Int J Qual Health Care. 2013;25(6):682‐688. 10.1093/intqhc/mzt063
    1. Agarwal AK, Murinson BB. New dimensions in patient‐physician interaction: values, autonomy, and medical information in the patient‐centered clinical encounter. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2012;3(3):e0017. 10.5041/RMMJ.10085
    1. Charmaz K. Loss of self: a fundamental form of suffering in the chronically ill. Sociol Health Illn. 1983;5(2):168‐195. 10.1111/1467-9566.ep10491512
    1. Williams G. The genesis of chronic illness: narrative re‐construction. Sociol Health Illn. 1984;6(2):175‐200. 10.1111/1467-9566.ep10778250

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren