Assessing Mobile Phone Digital Literacy and Engagement in User-Centered Design in a Diverse, Safety-Net Population: Mixed Methods Study

Sarah S Nouri, Patricia Avila-Garcia, Anupama Gunshekar Cemballi, Urmimala Sarkar, Adrian Aguilera, Courtney Rees Lyles, Sarah S Nouri, Patricia Avila-Garcia, Anupama Gunshekar Cemballi, Urmimala Sarkar, Adrian Aguilera, Courtney Rees Lyles

Abstract

Background: Health care systems are rapidly deploying digital tools for disease management; however, few studies have evaluated their usability by vulnerable populations. To understand the barriers to app usage among vulnerable populations, we employed user-centered design (UCD) methods in the development of a new text messaging app.

Objective: The study aimed to describe variations in patients' engagement in the app design process, focusing on limited health literacy (LHL), limited English proficiency (LEP), and limited digital literacy (LDL).

Methods: We conducted 20 in-depth semistructured interviews with primary care patients at a public health care system, used open-ended discussions and card sorting tasks to seek input about mobile phones and text messaging, and used open coding to categorize the patterns of mobile phone usage and to evaluate engagement in the card sorting process. We examined qualitative differences in engagement by examining the extensiveness of participant feedback on existing and novel text messaging content and calculated the proportion of patients providing extensive feedback on existing and novel content, overall and by health literacy, English proficiency, and digital literacy.

Results: The average age of the 20 participants was 59 (SD 8) years; 13 (65%) were female, 18 (90%) were nonwhite, 16 (80%) had LHL, and 13 (65%) had LEP. All had depression, and 14 (70%) had diabetes. Most participants had smartphones (18/20, 90%) and regularly used text messaging (15/20, 75%), but 14 (70%) of them reported having difficulty texting because of inability to type, physical disability, and low literacy. We identified 10 participants as specifically having LDL; 7 of these participants had LEP, and all 10 had LHL. Half of the participants required a modification of the card sorting activity owing to not understanding it or not being able to read the cards in the allotted time. The proportion of participants who gave extensive feedback on existing content was lower in participants with limited versus adequate English proficiency (4/13, 30% vs 5/7, 71%), limited versus adequate health literacy (7/16, 44% vs 3/4, 75%), and limited versus adequate digital literacy (4/10, 40% vs 6/10, 60%); none of these differences were statistically significant. When examining the proportion of patients who gave extensive feedback for novel messaging content, those with LHL were less engaged than those with adequate health literacy (8/16, 50% vs 4/4, 100%); there were no statistical differences by any subgroup.

Conclusions: Despite widespread mobile phone use, digital literacy barriers are common among vulnerable populations. Engagement in the card sorting activity varied among participants and appeared to be lower among those with LHL, LEP, and LDL. Researchers employing traditional UCD methods should routinely measure these communication domains among their end-user samples. Future work is needed to replicate our findings in larger samples, but augmentation of card sorting with direct observation and audiovisual cues may be more productive in eliciting feedback for those with communication barriers.

Keywords: digital literacy; health information technology; health literacy; limited English proficiency; mHealth; user-centered design.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Sarah S Nouri, Patricia Avila-Garcia, Anupama Gunshekar Cemballi, Urmimala Sarkar, Adrian Aguilera, Courtney Rees Lyles. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 29.08.2019.

References

    1. Rathbone AL, Prescott J. The use of mobile apps and SMS messaging as physical and mental health interventions: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017 Aug 24;19(8):e295. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7740.
    1. Anglada-Martinez H, Riu-Viladoms G, Martin-Conde M, Rovira-Illamola M, Sotoca-Momblona JM, Codina-Jane C. Does mhealth increase adherence to medication? Results of a systematic review. Int J Clin Pract. 2015 Jan;69(1):9–32. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.12582.
    1. Whitehead L, Seaton P. The effectiveness of self-management mobile phone and tablet apps in long-term condition management: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 16;18(5):e97. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4883.
    1. Wu Y, Yao X, Vespasiani G, Nicolucci A, Dong Y, Kwong J, Li L, Sun X, Tian H, Li S. Mobile app-based interventions to support diabetes self-management: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to identify functions associated with glycemic efficacy. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Mar 14;5(3):e35. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.6522.
    1. Sarkar U, Gourley GI, Lyles CR, Tieu L, Clarity C, Newmark L, Singh K, Bates DW. Usability of commercially available mobile applications for diverse patients. J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Dec;31(12):1417–26. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3771-6.
    1. O'Connor S, Hanlon P, O'Donnell CA, Garcia S, Glanville J, Mair FS. Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: a systematic review of qualitative studies. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016 Sep 15;16(1):120. doi: 10.1186/s12911-016-0359-3.
    1. Stowell E, Lyson MC, Saksono H, Wurth RC, Jimison H, Pavel M, Parker AG. Designing and Evaluating mHealth Interventions for Vulnerable Populations: A Systematic Review. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; CHI'18; April 21-26, 2018; Montreal, QC, Canada. 2018. pp. 1–17.
    1. Mackert M, Mabry-Flynn A, Champlin S, Donovan EE, Pounders K. Health literacy and health information technology adoption: the potential for a new digital divide. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Oct 4;18(10):e264. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6349.
    1. Chakkalakal RJ, Kripalani S, Schlundt DG, Elasy TA, Osborn CY. Disparities in using technology to access health information: race versus health literacy. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(3):e53–4. doi: 10.2337/dc13-1984.
    1. Broderick J, Devine T, Langhans E, Lemerise AJ, Lier S, Harris L. National Academy of Medicine. 2014. [2019-03-29]. Designing Health Literate Mobile Apps .
    1. Sarkar U, Karter AJ, Liu JY, Adler NE, Nguyen R, Lopez A, Schillinger D. The literacy divide: health literacy and the use of an internet-based patient portal in an integrated health system-results from the diabetes study of northern California (DISTANCE) J Health Commun. 2010;15(Suppl 2):183–96. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.499988.
    1. Pew Research Center. 2019. [2018-10-17]. Mobile Fact Sheet
    1. Aguilera A, Lyles CR. The case for jointly targeting diabetes and depression among vulnerable patients using digital technology. JMIR Diabetes. 2017 Jan 17;2(1):e1. doi: 10.2196/diabetes.6916.
    1. Ramirez V, Johnson E, Gonzalez C, Ramirez V, Rubino B, Rossetti G. Assessing the use of mobile health technology by patients: an observational study in primary care clinics. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016 Apr 19;4(2):e41. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.4928.
    1. Doherty G, Sharry J, Bang M, Alcañiz M, Baños R. Technology in Mental Health. CHI'08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems; CHI EA'08; April 5-10, 2008; Florence, Italy. 2008. pp. 3965–8.
    1. Yardley L, Spring BJ, Riper H, Morrison LG, Crane DH, Curtis K, Merchant GC, Naughton F, Blandford A. Understanding and promoting effective engagement with digital behavior change interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2016 Nov;51(5):833–42. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.015.
    1. Usability. [2019-03-29]. What & Why of Usability: Card Sorting .
    1. Dopp AR, Parisi KE, Munson SA, Lyon AR. A glossary of user-centered design strategies for implementation experts. Transl Behav Med. 2018 Dec 7; doi: 10.1093/tbm/iby119. (epub ahead of print)
    1. Aguilera A, Bruehlman-Senecal E, Demasi O, Avila P. Automated text messaging as an adjunct to cognitive behavioral therapy for depression: a clinical trial. J Med Internet Res. 2017 May 8;19(5):e148. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6914.
    1. Farris KB, Salgado TM, Batra P, Piette JD, Singh S, Guhad A, Newman S, Marshall VD, An L. Confirming the theoretical structure of expert-developed text messages to improve adherence to anti-hypertensive medications. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2016;12(4):578–91. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2015.09.009.
    1. Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004 Sep;36(8):588–94.
    1. Powers BJ, Trinh JV, Bosworth HB. Can this patient read and understand written health information? J Am Med Assoc. 2010 Jul 7;304(1):76–84. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.896.
    1. Sarkar U, Schillinger D, López A, Sudore R. Validation of self-reported health literacy questions among diverse English and Spanish-speaking populations. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Mar;26(3):265–71. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1552-1.
    1. Karliner LS, Napoles-Springer AM, Schillinger D, Bibbins-Domingo K, Pérez-Stable EJ. Identification of limited English proficient patients in clinical care. J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Oct;23(10):1555–60. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0693-y.
    1. Kayser L, Kushniruk A, Osborne RH, Norgaard O, Turner P. Enhancing the effectiveness of consumer-focused health information technology systems through ehealth literacy: a framework for understanding users' needs. JMIR Hum Factors. 2015 May 20;2(1):e9. doi: 10.2196/humanfactors.3696.
    1. Thies IM. SIGCHI Social Impact Award Talk -- Designing for Low-Literate Users. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems; CGI EA'17; May 6-11, 2017; Denver, Colorado, USA. 2017. pp. 8–9.
    1. Belay EG, McCrickard DS, Besufekad SA. Designing Mobile Interaction for Low-Literacy (D-MILL). Proceedings of the First African Conference on Human Computer Interaction; AfriCHI'16; November 21-25, 2016; Nairobi, Kenya. 2016. pp. 251–5.
    1. Mamedova S, Pawlowski E. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 2018. [2019-03-29]. A Description of US Adults Who Are Not Digitally Literate .
    1. Kushniruk A, Turner P. A framework for user involvement and context in the design and development of safe e-health systems. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;180:353–7. doi: 10.3233/978-1-61499-101-4-353.
    1. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHealth literacy: essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res. 2006 Jun 16;8(2):e9. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9.
    1. Paul CL. A modified Delphi approach to a new card sorting methodology. J Usability Stud. 2008;4(1):7–30.
    1. Wood JR, Wood LE. Card sorting: current practices and beyond. J Usability Stud. 2008;4(1):1–6.
    1. Dell N, Vaidyanathan V, Medhi I, Cutrell E, Thies W. Yours is Better: Participant Response Bias in HCI. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; CHI'12; May 5-10, 2012; Austin, TX, USA. 2012. pp. 1321–30.
    1. Mayberry LS, Berg CA, Harper KJ, Osborn CY. The design, usability, and feasibility of a family-focused diabetes self-care support mhealth intervention for diverse, low-income adults with type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Res. 2016;2016:7586385. doi: 10.1155/2016/7586385. doi: 10.1155/2016/7586385.
    1. Zachary WW, Michlig G, Kaplan A, Nguyen NT, Quinn CC, Surkan PJ. Participatory design of a social networking app to support type II diabetes self-management in low-income minority communities. Proc Int Symp Hum Factors Ergon Healthc. 2017 Jun;6(1):37–43. doi: 10.1177/2327857917061010.
    1. Aboumatar HJ, Carson KA, Beach MC, Roter DL, Cooper LA. The impact of health literacy on desire for participation in healthcare, medical visit communication, and patient reported outcomes among patients with hypertension. J Gen Intern Med. 2013 Nov;28(11):1469–76. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2466-5.
    1. Martin LT, Schonlau M, Haas A, Derose KP, Rosenfeld L, Buka SL, Rudd R. Patient activation and advocacy: which literacy skills matter most? J Health Commun. 2011;16(Suppl 3):177–90. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.604705.
    1. McCormack L, Thomas V, Lewis MA, Rudd R. Improving low health literacy and patient engagement: a social ecological approach. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jan;100(1):8–13. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.07.007.
    1. Bledsoe KL, Hopson RK. Conducting ethical research and evaluation in underserved communities. In: Mertens DM, Ginsberg PE, editors. The Handbook of Social Research Ethics. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 2013. pp. 391–406.
    1. Blakemore AH, Hann M, Howells K, Panagioti M, Sidaway M, Reeves D, Bower P. Patient activation in older people with long-term conditions and multimorbidity: correlates and change in a cohort study in the United Kingdom. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Oct 18;16(1):582. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1843-2.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere