A Mobile App Designed to Promote Shared Decision-Making in the Treatment of Psychotic Disorders: Feasibility and Acceptability Study.

IF 3 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2025-07-11 DOI:10.2196/68813
Mari Skoge, Sofie Ragnhild Aminoff, Elizabeth Ann Barrett, Gina Engen Bryhni, Kristine Kling, Kari Jorunn Kværner, Ingrid Melle, Erlend Mork, Carmen Simonsen, Linn Nathalie Støme, Josina Vink, Tor Gunnar Værnes, Kristin Lie Romm
{"title":"A Mobile App Designed to Promote Shared Decision-Making in the Treatment of Psychotic Disorders: Feasibility and Acceptability Study.","authors":"Mari Skoge, Sofie Ragnhild Aminoff, Elizabeth Ann Barrett, Gina Engen Bryhni, Kristine Kling, Kari Jorunn Kværner, Ingrid Melle, Erlend Mork, Carmen Simonsen, Linn Nathalie Støme, Josina Vink, Tor Gunnar Værnes, Kristin Lie Romm","doi":"10.2196/68813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Strengthening shared decision-making in mental health care may improve the quality of services and treatment outcomes, but its implementation in services for severe mental disorders is currently lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of iTandem (University of Oslo), a mobile app designed to promote shared decision-making in the treatment of psychotic disorders. In addition, the study aims to investigate mechanisms that potentially contribute to the intended effect of the app. iTandem is a therapy supplement that facilitates patient involvement in decisions regarding treatment goals and focus areas. It is designed for personalized use and contains 8 optional modules: sleep, medication, recovery, mood, psychosis, activity, substance use, and feedback concerning therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing assessment or treatment for psychotic disorders and their clinicians were recruited for the study. Patients and clinicians jointly used iTandem as part of standard treatment in a 6-week trial. We used a mixed-methods study design with a clear emphasis on qualitative methods. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed through descriptive statistics based on preintervention and postintervention questionnaires and app usage data, in addition to text responses to open-ended items. We conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of postintervention interviews to elaborate these measures and to explore mechanisms potentially contributing to achieving shared decision-making when using iTandem.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 9 patients and 8 clinicians completed the trial. The participants evaluated iTandem as a user-friendly and acceptable tool, but there were considerable variations in how the app was integrated into treatment and in perceptions of its clinical value. The thematic analysis suggests that iTandem has the potential to facilitate shared decision-making through supporting cognition and shifting the patient's role. We also identified scaffolding structures, an analogy of personalized support, as a precondition for these mechanisms and for the overall feasibility and acceptability of iTandem.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>iTandem was generally perceived as a feasible and acceptable tool in the treatment of patients with psychotic disorders. Our findings suggest that nonclinical aspects, such as support structures, are important to the feasibility and acceptability of such digital interventions and patients' aptness for digitalized treatment in general. Future research should explore related nonclinical aspects further instead of defining potential target groups based on diagnoses and symptom severity alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"12 ","pages":"e68813"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12274015/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/68813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Strengthening shared decision-making in mental health care may improve the quality of services and treatment outcomes, but its implementation in services for severe mental disorders is currently lacking.

Objective: This study aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of iTandem (University of Oslo), a mobile app designed to promote shared decision-making in the treatment of psychotic disorders. In addition, the study aims to investigate mechanisms that potentially contribute to the intended effect of the app. iTandem is a therapy supplement that facilitates patient involvement in decisions regarding treatment goals and focus areas. It is designed for personalized use and contains 8 optional modules: sleep, medication, recovery, mood, psychosis, activity, substance use, and feedback concerning therapy.

Methods: Patients undergoing assessment or treatment for psychotic disorders and their clinicians were recruited for the study. Patients and clinicians jointly used iTandem as part of standard treatment in a 6-week trial. We used a mixed-methods study design with a clear emphasis on qualitative methods. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed through descriptive statistics based on preintervention and postintervention questionnaires and app usage data, in addition to text responses to open-ended items. We conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of postintervention interviews to elaborate these measures and to explore mechanisms potentially contributing to achieving shared decision-making when using iTandem.

Results: A total of 9 patients and 8 clinicians completed the trial. The participants evaluated iTandem as a user-friendly and acceptable tool, but there were considerable variations in how the app was integrated into treatment and in perceptions of its clinical value. The thematic analysis suggests that iTandem has the potential to facilitate shared decision-making through supporting cognition and shifting the patient's role. We also identified scaffolding structures, an analogy of personalized support, as a precondition for these mechanisms and for the overall feasibility and acceptability of iTandem.

Conclusions: iTandem was generally perceived as a feasible and acceptable tool in the treatment of patients with psychotic disorders. Our findings suggest that nonclinical aspects, such as support structures, are important to the feasibility and acceptability of such digital interventions and patients' aptness for digitalized treatment in general. Future research should explore related nonclinical aspects further instead of defining potential target groups based on diagnoses and symptom severity alone.

一种旨在促进精神障碍治疗中共同决策的移动应用程序:可行性和可接受性研究。
背景:加强精神卫生保健中的共同决策可以改善服务质量和治疗结果,但目前在严重精神障碍服务中缺乏实施。目的:本研究旨在探讨iTandem(奥斯陆大学)的可行性和可接受性,iTandem是一款旨在促进精神障碍治疗中共同决策的移动应用程序。此外,该研究旨在调查可能有助于应用程序预期效果的机制。iTandem是一种治疗补充剂,可促进患者参与有关治疗目标和重点领域的决策。它是为个性化使用而设计的,包含8个可选模块:睡眠、药物、恢复、情绪、精神病、活动、物质使用和有关治疗的反馈。方法:招募正在接受精神障碍评估或治疗的患者及其临床医生进行研究。在为期6周的试验中,患者和临床医生共同使用iTandem作为标准治疗的一部分。我们采用混合方法研究设计,明确强调定性方法。通过基于干预前和干预后问卷调查和应用程序使用数据的描述性统计,以及对开放式项目的文本回复,评估可行性和可接受性。我们对干预后访谈进行了反思性专题分析,以详细说明这些措施,并探索在使用iTandem时可能有助于实现共同决策的机制。结果:共有9名患者和8名临床医生完成了试验。参与者认为iTandem是一个用户友好且可接受的工具,但在如何将该应用程序整合到治疗中以及对其临床价值的看法上存在相当大的差异。专题分析表明,iTandem有潜力通过支持认知和转变患者的角色来促进共同决策。我们还确定了脚手架结构,类似于个性化的支持,作为这些机制的先决条件,以及iTandem的整体可行性和可接受性。结论:iTandem被普遍认为是治疗精神障碍患者的一种可行和可接受的工具。我们的研究结果表明,非临床方面,如支撑结构,对于这种数字干预的可行性和可接受性以及患者对数字化治疗的适应性都很重要。未来的研究应进一步探索相关的非临床方面,而不是仅仅根据诊断和症状严重程度来确定潜在的目标群体。
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
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
审稿时长
12 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信