Engagement challenges in digital mental health programs: hybrid approaches and user retention of an online self-knowledge journey in Brazil.

IF 3.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in digital health Pub Date : 2024-09-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdgth.2024.1383999
Felipe Moretti, Tiago Bortolini, Larissa Hartle, Jorge Moll, Paulo Mattos, Daniel R Furtado, Leonardo Fontenelle, Ronald Fischer
{"title":"Engagement challenges in digital mental health programs: hybrid approaches and user retention of an online self-knowledge journey in Brazil.","authors":"Felipe Moretti, Tiago Bortolini, Larissa Hartle, Jorge Moll, Paulo Mattos, Daniel R Furtado, Leonardo Fontenelle, Ronald Fischer","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2024.1383999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have surged in popularity over the last few years. However, adherence to self-guided interventions remains a major hurdle to overcome. The current study utilized a phased implementation design, incorporating diverse samples and contexts to delve into the engagement challenges faced by a recently launched online mental health platform in Brazil with self-evaluation forms. Employing an iterative mixed-methods approach, including focus groups, online surveys, and think-aloud protocols, the research aims to evaluate user satisfaction, identify barriers to adherence, and explore potential hybrid solutions. Engagement in the platform was evaluated by descriptive statistics of the number of instruments completed, and qualitative interviews that were interpreted thematically. In the fully self-guided mode, 2,145 individuals registered, but a substantial majority (88.9%) engaged with the platform for only 1 day, and merely 3.3% completed all activities. In another sample of 50 participants were given a choice between online-only or a hybrid experience with face-to-face meetings. 40% of individuals from the hybrid group completed all activities, compared to 8% in the online-only format. Time constraints emerged as a significant barrier to engagement, with suggested improvements including app development, periodic reminders, and meetings with healthcare professionals. While the study identified weaknesses in the number and length of instruments, personalized results stood out as a major strength. Overall, the findings indicate high satisfaction with the mental health platform but underscore the need for improvements, emphasizing the promise of personalized mental health information and acknowledging persistent barriers in a digital-only setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11461457/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1383999","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have surged in popularity over the last few years. However, adherence to self-guided interventions remains a major hurdle to overcome. The current study utilized a phased implementation design, incorporating diverse samples and contexts to delve into the engagement challenges faced by a recently launched online mental health platform in Brazil with self-evaluation forms. Employing an iterative mixed-methods approach, including focus groups, online surveys, and think-aloud protocols, the research aims to evaluate user satisfaction, identify barriers to adherence, and explore potential hybrid solutions. Engagement in the platform was evaluated by descriptive statistics of the number of instruments completed, and qualitative interviews that were interpreted thematically. In the fully self-guided mode, 2,145 individuals registered, but a substantial majority (88.9%) engaged with the platform for only 1 day, and merely 3.3% completed all activities. In another sample of 50 participants were given a choice between online-only or a hybrid experience with face-to-face meetings. 40% of individuals from the hybrid group completed all activities, compared to 8% in the online-only format. Time constraints emerged as a significant barrier to engagement, with suggested improvements including app development, periodic reminders, and meetings with healthcare professionals. While the study identified weaknesses in the number and length of instruments, personalized results stood out as a major strength. Overall, the findings indicate high satisfaction with the mental health platform but underscore the need for improvements, emphasizing the promise of personalized mental health information and acknowledging persistent barriers in a digital-only setting.

数字心理健康项目中的参与挑战:巴西在线自我认知之旅的混合方法和用户保留率。
数字心理健康干预(DMHIs)在过去几年里大受欢迎。然而,坚持自我指导干预仍是需要克服的一大障碍。本研究采用分阶段实施的设计,结合不同的样本和背景,深入探讨巴西最近推出的在线心理健康平台所面临的自我评估表的参与挑战。本研究采用了一种迭代混合方法,包括焦点小组、在线调查和畅所欲言协议,旨在评估用户满意度、识别坚持使用的障碍并探索潜在的混合解决方案。通过对完成的工具数量进行描述性统计,以及对定性访谈进行主题阐释,对平台的参与度进行评估。在完全自我指导模式下,有 2,145 人注册,但绝大多数人(88.9%)只参与了 1 天,仅有 3.3% 的人完成了所有活动。在另一个 50 人的样本中,参与者可以选择仅在线体验或与面对面会谈的混合体验。混合体验组有 40% 的人完成了所有活动,而仅在线体验组只有 8% 的人完成了所有活动。时间限制是参与活动的一大障碍,建议的改进措施包括开发应用程序、定期提醒以及与医疗保健专业人员会面。虽然研究发现了工具数量和时间长度方面的不足,但个性化结果是一大优势。总体而言,研究结果表明,人们对心理健康平台的满意度很高,但也强调了改进的必要性,强调了个性化心理健康信息的前景,同时也承认在纯数字环境中仍存在障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信