Determinants of Successful eHealth Coaching for Consumer Lifestyle Changes: Qualitative Interview Study Among Health Care Professionals

Carl Joakim Brandt, Gabrielle Isidora Søgaard, Jane Clemensen, Jens Søndergaard, Jesper Bo Nielsen, Carl Joakim Brandt, Gabrielle Isidora Søgaard, Jane Clemensen, Jens Søndergaard, Jesper Bo Nielsen

Abstract

Background: Success with lifestyle change, such as weight loss, tobacco cessation, and increased activity level, using electronic health (eHealth) has been demonstrated in numerous studies short term. However, evidence on how to maintain the effect long-term has not been fully explored, even though there is a pressing need for long-term solutions. Recent studies indicate that weight loss can be achieved and maintained over 12 and 20 months in a primary care setting using a collaborative eHealth tool. The effect of collaborative eHealth in promoting lifestyle changes depends on competent and skilled dieticians, nurses, physiotherapists, and occupational therapists acting as eHealth coaches. How such health care professionals perceive delivering asynchronous eHealth coaching and which determinants they find to be essential to achieving successful long-term lifestyle coaching have only been briefly explored and deserve further exploration.

Objective: The aim of this study is to analyze how health care professionals perceive eHealth coaching and to explore what influences successful long-term lifestyle change for patients undergoing hybrid eHealth coaching using a collaborative eHealth tool.

Methods: A total of 10 health care professionals were recruited by purposive sampling. They were all women aged 36 to 65 years of age with a mean age of 48 years of age. A total of 8/10 (80%) had more than 15 years of experience in their field, and all had more than six months of experience providing eHealth lifestyle coaching using a combination of face-to-face meetings and asynchronous eHealth coaching. They worked in 5 municipalities in the Region of Southern Denmark. We performed individual, qualitative, semistructured, in-depth interviews in their workplace about their experiences with health coaching about lifestyle change, both for their patients and for themselves, and mainly how they perceived using a collaborative eHealth solution as a part of their work.

Results: The health care professionals all found establishing and maintaining an empathic relationship essential and that asynchronous eHealth lifestyle coaching challenged this compared to face-to-face coaching. The primary reason was that unlike typical in-person encounters in health care, they did not receive immediate feedback from the patients. We identified four central themes relevant to the health care professionals in their asynchronous eHealth coaching: (1) establishing an empathic relationship, (2) reflection in asynchronous eHealth coaching, (3) identifying realistic goals based on personal barriers, and (4) staying connected in asynchronous coaching.

Conclusions: Establishing and maintaining an empathic relationship is probably the most crucial factor for successful subsequent eHealth coaching. It was of paramount importance to get to know the patient first, and the asynchronous interaction aspect presented challenges because of the delay in response times (both ways). It also presented opportunities for reflection before answering. The health care professionals found they had to provide both relational communication and goal-oriented coaching when using eHealth solutions. Going forward, the quality of the health care professional-patient interaction will need attention if patients are to benefit from collaborative eHealth coaching fully.

Keywords: behavior change; eHealth coaching; empathy; healthy lifestyle; lifestyle; mHealth; mobile health units; primary care; primary health care; public health; telemedicine.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: CJB owns shares in Liva Healthcare A/S, the company that has developed the technical platform, LIVA, used in the study. The other authors declare that they have no personal financial interests related to the subject matters discussed in the manuscript.

©Carl Joakim Brandt, Gabrielle Isidora Søgaard, Jane Clemensen, Jens Søndergaard, Jesper Bo Nielsen. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 05.07.2018.

References

    1. Afshin A, Babalola D, Mclean M, Yu Z, Ma W, Chen C, Arabi M, Mozaffarian D. Information Technology and Lifestyle: A Systematic Evaluation of Internet and Mobile Interventions for Improving Diet, Physical Activity, Obesity, Tobacco, and Alcohol Use. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Aug 31;5(9):e003058. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.003058.
    1. Sorgente A, Pietrabissa G, Manzoni GM, Re F, Simpson S, Perona S, Rossi A, Cattivelli R, Innamorati M, Jackson JB, Castelnuovo G. Web-Based Interventions for Weight Loss or Weight Loss Maintenance in Overweight and Obese People: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews. J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jun 26;19(6):e229. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6972.
    1. Lean ME, Leslie WS, Barnes AC, Brosnahan N, Thom G, McCombie L, Peters C, Zhyzhneuskaya S, Al-Mrabeh A, Hollingsworth KG, Rodrigues AM, Rehackova L, Adamson AJ, Sniehotta FF, Mathers JC, Ross HM, McIlvenna Y, Stefanetti R, Trenell M, Welsh P, Kean S, Ford I, McConnachie A, Sattar N, Taylor R. Primary care-led weight management for remission of type 2 diabetes (DiRECT): an open-label, cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2018 Dec 10;391(10120):541–551. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33102-1.
    1. Jarbøl DE, Larsen PV, Gyrd-Hansen D, Søndergaard J, Brandt C, Leppin A, Barfoed BL, Nielsen JB. Determinants of preferences for lifestyle changes versus medication and beliefs in ability to maintain lifestyle changes. A population-based survey. Prev Med Rep. 2017 Jun;6:66–73. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.02.010.
    1. Brandt CJ, Søgaard GI, Clemensen J, Sndergaard J, Nielsen JB. General Practitioners' Perspective on eHealth and Lifestyle Change: Qualitative Interview Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Apr 17;6(4):e88. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.8988.
    1. Moyers TB, Miller WR. Is low therapist empathy toxic? Psychol Addict Behav. 2013 Sep;27(3):878–84. doi: 10.1037/a0030274.
    1. Brandt Carl Joakim, Clemensen Jane, Nielsen Jesper Bo, Søndergaard Jens. Drivers for successful long-term lifestyle change, the role of e-health: a qualitative interview study. BMJ Open. 2018 Dec 12;8(3):e017466. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017466.
    1. Brandt V, Brandt C, Glintborg D, Arendal C, Toubro S, Brandt K. Sustained weight loss during 20 months using a personalized interactive internet based dietician advice program in a general practice setting. International Journal on Advances in Life Sciences Internet (1&2) 2011;3:23–8.
    1. Haste A, Adamson AJ, McColl E, Araujo-Soares V, Bell R. Web-Based Weight Loss Intervention for Men With Type 2 Diabetes: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Diabetes. 2017 Jul 07;2(2):e14. doi: 10.2196/diabetes.7430.
    1. Smith E, Bradbury K, Scott L, Steele M, Little P, Yardley L. Providing online weight management in Primary Care: a mixed methods process evaluation of healthcare practitioners' experiences of using and supporting patients using POWeR. Implement Sci. 2017 Dec 25;12(1):69. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0596-6.
    1. Collins C, Rochfort A. InTechOpen. 2016. Promoting Self-Management and Patient Empowerment in Primary Care, Primary Care in Practice-Integration is Needed; pp. 27–42.
    1. Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, O'Connor D, Patey A, Ivers N, Foy R, Duncan EM, Colquhoun H, Grimshaw JM, Lawton R, Michie S. A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci. 2017 Jun 21;12(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9.
    1. Danish Ministry of Health. Copenhagen: Danish Ministry of Health; 2012. [2017-10-11]. eHealth in Denmark - eHealth as part of a coherent Danish health care system .
    1. Mason M. Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews. FQS. 2010;11(3) doi: 10.17169/fqs-11.3.1428.
    1. Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Interviews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. 3rd ed. United States of America: SAGE; 2015.
    1. Yip C, Han NR, Sng BL. Legal and ethical issues in research. Indian J Anaesth. 2016 Sep;60(9):684–688. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.190627.
    1. Koch C, From K, Bech R, Sode A, Brandt CJ, Bolting L, Balantyne A. Liva Healthcare. [2017-10-10]. .
    1. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, Altman DG, Barbour V, Macdonald H, Johnston M, Lamb SE, Dixon-Woods M, McCulloch P, Wyatt JC, Chan A, Michie S. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ. 2014;348:1687.
    1. Michie S, Ashford S, Sniehotta FF, Dombrowski SU, Bishop A, French DP. A refined taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to help people change their physical activity and healthy eating behaviours: the CALO-RE taxonomy. Psychol Health. 2011 Nov;26(11):1479–98. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2010.540664.
    1. Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001 Aug 11;358(9280):483–8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.
    1. Sandelowski M. Focus on research methods - whatever happened to qualitative description? Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334–40.
    1. QSR International Pty Ltd NVIVO 11 PRO for Windows. [2017-10-11]. .
    1. Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:45. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45.
    1. Moyers TB, Houck J, Rice SL, Longabaugh R, Miller WR. Therapist empathy, combined behavioral intervention, and alcohol outcomes in the COMBINE research project. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2016 Mar;84(3):221–9. doi: 10.1037/ccp0000074.
    1. Riess H. The Science of Empathy. J Patient Exp. 2017 Jun;4(2):74–77. doi: 10.1177/2374373517699267.
    1. Holmberg C, Berg C, Dahlgren J, Lissner L, Chaplin JE. Health literacy in a complex digital media landscape: Pediatric obesity patients' experiences with online weight, food, and health information. Health Informatics J. 2018 Mar 01;:1460458218759699. doi: 10.1177/1460458218759699.
    1. Zoffmann V, Harder I, Kirkevold M. A person-centered communication and reflection model: sharing decision-making in chronic care. Qual Health Res. 2008 May;18(5):670–85. doi: 10.1177/1049732307311008.
    1. Tran CS, Liddy CE, Liu DM, Afkham A, Keely EJ. eConsults to endocrinologists improve access and change primary care provider behavior. Endocrine Practice. 2016 Jun 13;22(10):1145–1150. doi: 10.4158/EP161321.OR.
    1. Verhoeven F, Tanja-Dijkstra K, Nijland N, Eysenbach G, van GL. Asynchronous and synchronous teleconsultation for diabetes care: a systematic literature review. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010 May;4(3):666–84.
    1. Nielsen JB, Leppin A, Gyrd-Hansen DE, Jarbøl DE, Søndergaard J, Larsen PV. Barriers to lifestyle changes for prevention of cardiovascular disease - a survey among 40-60-year old Danes. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017 Sep 12;17(1):245. doi: 10.1186/s12872-017-0677-0.
    1. Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav. 2004 Apr;31(2):143–64. doi: 10.1177/1090198104263660.
    1. Michelson KN, Patel R, Haber-Barker N, Emanuel L, Frader J. End-of-life care decisions in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: roles professionals play. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013 Jan;14(1):e34–44. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e31826e7408.
    1. Ellis R, Connor U, Marshall J. Development of patient-centric linguistically tailored psychoeducational messages to support nutrition and medication self-management in type 2 diabetes: a feasibility study. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2014;8:1399–408. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S69291. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S69291.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅