The Potential Use and Value of a Wearable Monitoring Bracelet for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Qualitative Study Investigating the Patient and Health Care Professional Perspectives
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The occurrence of exacerbations has major effects on the health of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Monitoring devices that measure (vital) parameters hold promise for timely identification and treatment of exacerbations. Stakeholders' perspectives on the use of monitoring devices are of importance for the successful development and implementation of a device. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the potential use and value of a wearable monitoring bracelet (MB) for patients with COPD at high risk for exacerbation. The perspectives of health care professionals as well as patients were examined, both immediately after hospitalization and over a longer period. Furthermore, potential facilitators and barriers to the use and implementation of an MB were explored. METHODS: Data for this qualitative study were collected from January to April 2023. A total of 11 participants (eg, n=6 health care professionals [HCPs], 2 patients, and 3 additional patients) participated. In total, 2 semistructured focus groups were conducted via video calls; 1 with HCPs of various professional backgrounds and 1 with patients. In addition, 3 semistructured individual interviews were held with patients. The interviews and focus groups addressed attitudes, wishes, needs, as well as factors that could either support or impede the potential MB use. Data from interviews and focus groups were coded and analyzed according to the principles of the framework method. RESULTS: HCPs and patients both predominantly emphasized the importance of an MB in terms of promptly identifying exacerbations by detecting deviations from normal (vital) parameters, and subsequently alerting users. According to HCPs, this is how an MB should support the self-management of patients. Most participants did not anticipate major differences in value and use of an MB between the short-term and the long-term periods after hospitalization. Facilitators of the potential use and implementation of an MB that participants highlighted were ease of use and some form of support for patients in using an MB and interpreting the data. HCPs as well as patients expressed concerns about potential costs as a barrier to use and implementation. Another barrier that HCPs mentioned, was the prerequisite of digital literacy for patients to be able to interpret and react to the data from an MB. CONCLUSIONS: HCPs and patients both recognize that an MB could be beneficial and valuable to patients with COPD at high risk for exacerbation, in the short as well as the long term. In particular, they perceived value in supporting self-management of patients with COPD. Stakeholders would be able to use the obtained insights in support of the effective implementation of MBs in COPD patient care, which can potentially improve health care and the overall well-being of patients with COPD.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».