An overview of facilitators and barriers in the development of eHealth interventions for people of low socioeconomic position: A Delphi study

A preventive integrated eHealth approach for individuals with a low socioeconomic position: protocol for a realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

Adoption of standalone eHealth tools is low among persons in lower socioeconomic groups. The preventive integrated eHealth approach combines blended care with an active and personal approach to facilitate access to local care, tailored to the needs of the participant. We describe the four step preventive integrated eHealth approach for individuals with a low socioeconomic position and the realist evaluation protocol of the intervention and implementation. The realist evaluation centers around the question, 'what works for whom in what circumstances and why'.

METHODS

The study population will consist of adult individuals with a low socioeconomic position, who participate in the preventive integrated eHealth approach in one of the participating locations in the Netherlands. The four-step intervention consists of: (1) a proactive invitation of participants by care professionals, (2) the use of an eHealth tool that produces a personalized health report, (3) a personal consultation with a care professional to discuss the personalized health report and set a goal to work on, and (4) active referral to local social and health care. An initial program theory theorized from literature and stakeholder involvement is presented. Qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis with participants (survey at zero, three and twelve months and focus groups at six months) and professionals (interviews at three months) will inform the realist evaluation and serves to test and refine the initial program theory.

DISCUSSION

Our mixed-methods realist evaluation on the effect and implementation of a personal and active blended care approach will elucidate what elements trigger the mechanisms and responses of how individuals with a low socioeconomic position experience the preventive integrated eHealth approach. This will inform the way a preventative health check incorporating eHealth can be used to its full potential for low socioeconomic positioned groups to help close the digital divide and contribute to reduce health disparities.

Guide Development for eHealth Interventions Targeting People With a Low Socioeconomic Position: Participatory Design Approach

BACKGROUND

People with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) are less likely to benefit from eHealth interventions, exacerbating social health inequalities. Professionals developing eHealth interventions for this group face numerous challenges. A comprehensive guide to support these professionals in their work could mitigate these inequalities.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop a web-based guide to support professionals in the development, adaptation, evaluation, and implementation of eHealth interventions for people with a low SEP.

METHODS

This study consisted of 2 phases. The first phase involved a secondary analysis of 2 previous qualitative and quantitative studies. In this phase, we synthesized insights from the previous studies to develop the guide's content and information structure. In the second phase, we used a participatory design process. This process included iterative development and evaluation of the guide's design with 11 professionals who had experience with both eHealth and the target group. We used test versions (prototypes) and think-aloud testing combined with semistructured interviews and a questionnaire to identify design requirements and develop and adapt the guide accordingly.

RESULTS

The secondary analysis resulted in a framework of recommendations for developing the guide, which was categorized under 5 themes: development, reach, adherence, evaluation, and implementation. The participatory design process resulted in 16 requirements on system, content, and service aspects for the design of the guide. For the system category, the guide was required to have an open navigation strategy leading to more specific information and short pages with visual elements. Content requirements included providing comprehensible information, scientific evidence, a user perspective, information on practical applications, and a personal and informal tone of voice. Service requirements involved improving suitability for different professionals, ensuring long-term viability, and a focus on implementation. Based on these requirements, we developed the final version of "the inclusive eHealth guide."

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusive eHealth guide provides a practical, user-centric tool for professionals aiming to develop, adapt, evaluate, and implement eHealth interventions for people with a low SEP, with the aim of reducing health disparities in this population. Future research should investigate its suitability for different end-user goals, its external validity, its applicability in specific contexts, and its real-world impact on social health inequality.