Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Aug 4;21(8):e14750.
doi: 10.2196/14750.

Automated Text Messaging With Patients in Department of Veterans Affairs Specialty Clinics: Cluster Randomized Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Automated Text Messaging With Patients in Department of Veterans Affairs Specialty Clinics: Cluster Randomized Trial

Vera Yakovchenko et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Acceptability of mobile phone text messaging as a means of asynchronous communication between health care systems and patients is growing. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has adopted an automated texting system (aTS) for national rollout. The aTS allows providers to develop clinical texting protocols to promote patient self-management and allows clinical teams to monitor patient progress between in-person visits. Texting-supported hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment has not been previously tested.

Objective: Guided by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM), we developed an aTS HCV protocol and conducted a mixed methods, hybrid type 2 effectiveness implementation study comparing two programs supporting implementation of the aTS HCV protocol for medication adherence in patients with HCV.

Methods: Seven VA HCV specialty clinics were randomized to usual aTS implementation versus an augmented implementation facilitation program. Implementation process measures included facilitation metrics, usability, and usefulness. Implementation outcomes included provider and patient use of the aTS HCV protocol, and effectiveness outcomes included medication adherence, health perceptions and behaviors, and sustained virologic response (SVR).

Results: Across the seven randomized clinics, there were 293 facilitation events using a core set of nine implementation strategies (157 events in augmented implementation facilitation, 136 events in usual implementation). Providers found the aTS appropriate with high potential for scale-up but not without difficulties in startup, patient selection and recruitment, and clinic workflow integration. Patients largely found the aTS easy to use and helpful; however, low perceived need for self-management support contributed to high declination. Reach and use was modest with 197 patients approached, 71 (36%) enrolled, 50 (25%) authenticated, and 32 (16%) using the aTS. In augmented implementation facilitation clinics, more patients actively used the aTS HCV protocol compared with usual clinic patients (20% vs 12%). Patients who texted reported lower distress about failing HCV treatment (13/15, 87%, vs 8/15, 53%; P=.05) and better adherence to HCV medication (11/15, 73%, reporting excellent adherence vs 6/15, 40%; P=.06), although SVR did not differ by group.

Conclusions: The aTS is a promising intervention for improving patient self-management; however, augmented approaches to implementation may be needed to support clinician buy-in and patient engagement. Considering the behavioral, social, organizational, and technical scale-up challenges that we documented, successful and sustained implementation of the aTS may require implementation strategies that operate at the clinic, provider, and patient levels.

Trial registration: Retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03898349; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03898349.

Keywords: digital health; digital medicine; eHealth; implementation facilitation; self-management; texting; veterans.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of clinics in the study and participants, identified as texters and nontexters.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Facilitation events over time by clinic and implementation arm.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Texting engagement by implementation and facilitation arm. HCV: hepatitis C virus; aTS: automated texting system.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Fjeldsoe BS, Marshall AL, Miller YD. Behavior change interventions delivered by mobile telephone short-message service. Am J Prev Med. 2009 Feb;36(2):165–173. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.09.040. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hall AK, Cole-Lewis H, Bernhardt JM. Mobile text messaging for health: a systematic review of reviews. Annu Rev Public Health. 2015 Mar 18;36:393–415. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122855. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/25785892 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Househ M. The role of short messaging service in supporting the delivery of healthcare: an umbrella systematic review. Health Informatics J. 2014 Jul 18;22(2):140–150. doi: 10.1177/1460458214540908. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krishna S, Boren SA, Balas EA. Healthcare via cell phones: a systematic review. Telemed J E Health. 2009 Apr;15(3):231–240. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2008.0099. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kannisto KA, Koivunen MH, Välimäki MA. Use of mobile phone text message reminders in health care services: a narrative literature review. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(10):e222. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3442. http://www.jmir.org/2014/10/e222/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data