IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0064662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Pilot Study of an mHealth Application for Healthcare Workers: Poor Uptake Despite High Reported Acceptability at a Rural South African Community-Based MDR-TB Treatment Program

Author

Listed:
  • Krisda H Chaiyachati
  • Marian Loveday
  • Stephen Lorenz
  • Neal Lesh
  • Lee-Megan Larkan
  • Sandro Cinti
  • Gerald H Friedland
  • Jessica E Haberer

Abstract

Introduction: As the South African province of KwaZulu-Natal addresses a growing multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) epidemic by shifting care and treatment from trained specialty centers to community hospitals, delivering and monitoring MDR-TB therapy has presented new challenges. In particular, tracking and reporting adverse clinical events have been difficult for mobile healthcare workers (HCWs), trained health professionals who travel daily to patient homes to administer and monitor therapy. We designed and piloted a mobile phone application (Mobilize) for mobile HCWs that electronically standardized the recording and tracking of MDR-TB patients on low-cost, functional phones. Objective: We assess the acceptability and feasibility of using Mobilize to record and submit adverse events forms weekly during the intensive phase of MDR-TB therapy and evaluate mobile HCW perceptions throughout the pilot period. Methods: All five mobile HCWs at one site were trained and provided with phones. Utilizing a mixed-methods evaluation, mobile HCWs’ usage patterns were tracked electronically for seven months and analyzed. Qualitative focus groups and questionnaires were designed to understand the impact of mobile phone technology on the work environment. Results: Mobile HCWs submitted nine of 33 (27%) expected adverse events forms, conflicting with qualitative results in which mobile HCWs stated that Mobilize improved adverse events communication, helped their daily workflow, and could be successfully expanded to other health interventions. When presented with the conflict between their expressed views and actual practice, mobile HCWs cited forgetfulness and believed patients should take more responsibility for their own care. Discussion: This pilot experience demonstrated poor uptake by HCWs despite positive responses to using mHealth. Though our results should be interpreted cautiously because of the small number of mobile HCWs and MDR-TB patients in this study, we recommend carefully exploring the motivations of HCWs and technologic enhancements prior to scaling new mHealth initiatives in resource poor settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Krisda H Chaiyachati & Marian Loveday & Stephen Lorenz & Neal Lesh & Lee-Megan Larkan & Sandro Cinti & Gerald H Friedland & Jessica E Haberer, 2013. "A Pilot Study of an mHealth Application for Healthcare Workers: Poor Uptake Despite High Reported Acceptability at a Rural South African Community-Based MDR-TB Treatment Program," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-8, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0064662
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0064662
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0064662&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0064662?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0064662. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.