{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016726943942133816, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.286931818181818, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Patient experiences and implications for consultation outcomes and treatment adherence using mHealth applications among health care professionals (Preprint)


 BACKGROUND
 mHealth is a broad term for the use of mobile communication devices for healthcare services delivery. The use of mobile devices by health care professionals (HCPs) has transformed many aspects of clinical training and practice. However, there are still gaps in knowledge concerning patient perception of the use of mHealth technologies by HCP during secondary care consultations.
 
 
 OBJECTIVE
 To explore the impact on patient experience and implications for consultation outcomes and treatment adherence. Introduction of new technological application into interactions that have very set expectations and roles and possibility for attendant disruption of patient expectations.
 
 
 METHODS
 This paper explores, via in-depth interviews, patient opinions regarding the usage of mHealth applications by health care professionals (HCPs) during consultations, identifying the paradoxes and coping behaviors to deal with those paradoxes. This qualitative study recruited ten respondents using purposive sampling and snowballing techniques through in-depth interviews.
 
 
 RESULTS
 The results comprise paradoxes and coping behaviors. They showed that convenience, time savings, accuracy of diagnosis and reduction of errors are the important elements for using mHealth for both HCP and patient. In addition, respondents perceived that mobile health apps facilitate HCP engagement of patients and assist explanations and better patient understanding. Interaction and the quality of the interaction were acknowledged as significant in HCP-patient communication and patient compliance with treatment.
 
 
 CONCLUSIONS
 To sum, many patients were responsive to the idea of mHealth, both by the doctor and themselves, but wanted to have regulation of use of apps, better involvement and explanations and not have the doctor lose focus on the patient, that is, the feeling of personalized treatment. They also were worried that the HCP might seem to ignore the patient or withdraw from the type of interaction that makes the consultation ‘human.’
