Barriers and facilitators to the availability of efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults living with cancer and their caregivers: A systematic literature review and author survey study

Adeola Bamgboje-Ayodele; Allan 'Ben' Smith; Camille E Short; Joanna E Fardell; Joanne Shaw; Lisa Beatty; Kristen Higgins; Perri R Tutelman; Christine T Chambers; Afaf Girgis

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2021.03.012

Barriers and facilitators to the availability of efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults living with cancer and their caregivers: A systematic literature review and author survey study

Patient Educ Couns. 2021 Oct;104(10):2480-2489. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.03.012. Epub 2021 Mar 10.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Centre for Oncology Education and Research Translation (CONCERT), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: a.bamgboje@unsw.edu.au.
² Centre for Oncology Education and Research Translation (CONCERT), Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
³ Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences and Melbourne School of Health Sciences (jointly appointed), The University of Melbourne, Australia.
⁴ School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW Medicine, University of New South Wales; Behavioural Sciences Unit, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children's Hospital, Australia.
⁵ Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
⁶ Flinders Health & Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine & Public Health, Flinders University, Australia.
⁷ Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University and Centre for Pediatric Pain Research, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada.

PMID: 33741232
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.03.012

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to examine barriers and facilitators to the dissemination of efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults affected by cancer, and quantify funding used to develop and evaluate these digital health tools.

Methods: We conducted: (1) a systematic literature review to identify efficacious self-directed digital health tools for adults affected by cancer, published between 2009 and 2019 and (2) an author survey to identify barriers and facilitators to dissemination of those tools, grant funding and the user centredness of their design (UCD) process.

Results: Of 1314 screened articles, 29 articles describing 26 tools met the inclusion criteria. From 26 surveys sent, 12 were completed, 6 of which described disseminated tools. Whilst researchers' motivation and infrastructure support facilitate tool dissemination, limited funds, lack of infrastructure and limited research timelines are the most common barriers. A median of AUD$250,000 was spent on tools not disseminated to end-users.

Conclusion: Although incorporating UCD processes in the development of digital health tools is important, it is imperative to integrate implementation processes into the planning stages of tool development to ensure dissemination.

Practice implications: Researchers, academic institutions, funding agencies and government and non-government organisations all have roles to play to support long-term implementation.

Keywords: Cancer; Digital health; Implementation science; Self-management; User-centred design.

Publication types

Review
Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Adult
Caregivers*
Delivery of Health Care
Humans
Neoplasms* / therapy
Surveys and Questionnaires