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
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Oct;8(2):e002625.
doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2022-002625.

Engagement and attrition with eHealth tools for remote monitoring in chronic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Michaël Doumen  1   2 , Diederik De Cock  3 , Caroline Van Lierde  4 , Albrecht Betrains  5 , Sofia Pazmino  4 , Delphine Bertrand  4 , René Westhovens  4   2 , Patrick Verschueren  4   2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Engagement and attrition with eHealth tools for remote monitoring in chronic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Michaël Doumen et al. RMD Open. 2022 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: Although eHealth tools are potentially useful for remote disease monitoring, barriers include concerns of low engagement and high attrition. We aimed to summarise evidence on patients' engagement and attrition with eHealth tools for remotely monitoring disease activity/impact in chronic arthritis.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for original articles and abstracts published before September 2022. Eligible studies reported quantitative measures of patients' engagement with eHealth instruments used for remote monitoring in chronic arthritis. Engagement rates were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

Results: Of 8246 references, 45 studies were included: 23 using smartphone applications, 13 evaluating wearable activity trackers, 7 using personal digital assistants, 6 including web-based platforms and 2 using short message service. Wearable-based studies mostly reported engagement as the proportion of days the tracker was worn (70% pooled across 6 studies). For other eHealth tools, engagement was mostly reported as completion rates for remote patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The pooled completion rate was 80%, although between-study heterogeneity was high (I2 93%) with significant differences between eHealth tools and frequency of PRO-collection. Engagement significantly decreased with longer study duration, but attrition varied across studies (0%-89%). Several predictors of higher engagement were reported. Data on the influence of PRO-reporting frequency were conflicting.

Conclusion: Generally high patient engagement was reported with eHealth tools for remote monitoring in chronic arthritis. However, we found considerable between-study heterogeneity and a relative lack of real-world data. Future studies should use standardised measures of engagement, preferably assessed in a daily practice setting.

Trial registeration number: The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021267936).

Keywords: arthritis; epidemiology; health services research; patient reported outcome measures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow chart of systematic review. ICTRP, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of pooled completion rates for patient-reported outcomes collected with eHealth tools.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot of pooled completion rates according to eHealth tool. PDA, personal digital assistant; SMS, short message service; WAT, wearable activity tracker.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of pooled completion rates according to patient-reported outcome collection frequency.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot of pooled proportion of study days a wearable activity tracker was actively worn.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hoy DG, Smith E, Cross M, et al. . The global burden of musculoskeletal conditions for 2010: an overview of methods. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:982–9. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204344 - DOI - PubMed
    1. March L, Smith EUR, Hoy DG, et al. . Burden of disability due to musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2014;28:353–66. 10.1016/j.berh.2014.08.002 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pazmino S, Lovik A, Boonen A, et al. . New indicator for discordance between patient-reported and traditional disease activity outcomes in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2022. 10.1093/rheumatology/keac213. [Epub ahead of print: 13 Apr 2022]. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Walker UA, Mueller RB, Jaeger VK, et al. . Disease activity dynamics in rheumatoid arthritis: patients' self-assessment of disease activity via WebApp. Rheumatology 2017;56:1707–12. 10.1093/rheumatology/kex229 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schoemaker CG, de Wit MPT. Treat-to-Target from the patient perspective is Bowling for a perfect strike. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021;73:9–11. 10.1002/art.41461 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types