Usability and Satisfaction Outcomes from a Pilot Open Trial Examining Remote Patient Monitoring to Treat Pediatric Obesity during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Remote Patient Monitoring
3. Measures
3.1. Compensation
3.2. Data Analysis Plan
4. Results
4.1. Preliminary Analyses
4.2. Engagement and Satisfaction
4.3. Exploratory Analyses
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ogden, C.L.; Fryar, C.D.; Martin, C.B.; Freedman, D.S.; Carroll, M.D.; Gu, Q.; Hales, C.M. Trends in Obesity Prevalence by Race and Hispanic Origin-1999–2000 to 2017–2018. JAMA 2020, 324, 1208–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Estrada, E.; Eneli, I.; Hampl, S.; Mietus-Snyder, M.; Mirza, N.; Rhodes, E.; Sweeney, B.; Tinajero-Deck, L.; Woolford, S.J.; Pont, S.J.; et al. Children’s Hospital Association consensus statements for comorbidities of childhood obesity. Child. Obes. 2014, 10, 304–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seidell, J.C.; Halberstadt, J. The global burden of obesity and the challenges of prevention. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2015, 66, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cawley, J. The economics of childhood obesity. Health Aff. 2010, 29, 364–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lim, C.; Rutledge, L.; Sandridge, S.; King, K.; Jefferson, D.; Tucker, T. Design, Implementation, and Examination of a Remote Patient Monitoring System for Pediatric Obesity: Protocol for an Open Trial Pilot Study. JMIR Res. Protoc. 2021, 10, e29858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barlow, S.E.; Expert, C. Expert committee recommendations regarding the prevention, assessment, and treatment of child and adolescent overweight and obesity: Summary report. Pediatrics 2007, 120, S164–S192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maggio, A.B.; Saunders Gasser, C.; Gal-Duding, C.; Beghetti, M.; Martin, M.X.; Farpour-Lambert, N.J.; Chamay-Weber, C. BMI changes in children and adolescents attending a specialized childhood obesity center: A cohort study. BMC Pediatr. 2013, 13, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, J.A., 3rd; Johnson, A.M. Urban-rural differences in childhood and adolescent obesity in the United States: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Child. Obes. 2015, 11, 233–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- May, A.L.; Pan, L.; Sherry, B.; Blanck, H.M.; Galuska, D.; Dalenius, K.; Polhamus, B.; Kettel-Khan, L.; Grummer-Strawn, L.M. Vital signs: Obesity among low-income, preschool-aged children—United States, 2008–2011. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2013, 62, 629–634. [Google Scholar]
- Center KCD. Mississippi Kids Count. Available online: datacenter.kidscount.org/MS (accessed on 8 June 2021).
- Morrow, A.; Sandridge, S.; Lim, C.S. Prevalence of Childhood Obesity: 2016–2017 By State. In Proceedings of the ObesityWeek 2019, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 7 November 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Field, M.J.; Grigsby, J. Telemedicine and remote patient monitoring. JAMA 2002, 288, 423–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coye, M.J.; Haselkorn, A.; DeMello, S. Remote patient management: Technology-enabled innovation and evolving business models for chronic disease care. Health Aff. 2009, 28, 126–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shea, S.; Weinstock, R.S.; Starren, J.; Teresi, J.; Palmas, W.; Field, L.; Morin, P.; Goland, R.; Izquierdo, R.E.; Wolff, L.T.; et al. A randomized trial comparing telemedicine case management with usual care in older, ethnically diverse, medically underserved patients with diabetes mellitus. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Suh, M.K.; Chen, C.A.; Woodbridge, J.; Tu, M.K.; Kim, J.I.; Nahapetian, A.; Evangelista, L.S.; Sarrafzadeh, M. A Remote Patient Monitoring System for Congestive Heart Failure. J. Med. Syst. 2011, 35, 1165–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Morak, J.; Schindler, K.; Goerzer, E.; Kastner, P.; Toplak, H.; Ludvik, B.; Schreier, G. A pilot study of mobile phone-based therapy for obese patients. J. Telemed. Telecare 2008, 14, 147–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Liu, D.B.; Zhong, J.W.; Huang, Z.-Y.; Qiu, S.-Y.; Zhou, Y.-P.; Yi, X.-H. Feasibility of a remote monitoring system for home-based non-invasive positive pressure ventilation of children and infants. Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol. 2012, 76, 1737–1740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Malloy, L.E.; Gingerich, J.; Olson, M.D.; Atkins, D.L. Remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable devices in the pediatric population improves detection of adverse events. Pediatr. Cardiol. 2014, 35, 301–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lai, J.S.; Yount, S.; Beaumont, J.L.; Cella, D.; Toia, J.; Goldman, S. A patient-centered symptom monitoring and reporting system for children and young adults with cancer (SyMon-SAYS). Pediatr. Blood Cancer 2015, 62, 1813–1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ly, T.T.; Keenan, D.B.; Roy, A.; Han, J.; Grosman, B.; Cantwell, M.; Kurtz, N.; von Eyben, R.; Clinton, P.; Wilson, D.M.; et al. Automated Overnight Closed-Loop Control Using a Proportional-Integral-Derivative Algorithm with Insulin Feedback in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes at Diabetes Camp. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 2016, 18, 377–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Puyau, M.R.; Adolph, A.L.; Vohra, F.A.; Butte, N.F. Validation and calibration of physical activity monitors in children. Obes. Res. 2002, 10, 150–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Parcel, G.S.; Edmundson, E.; Perry, C.L.; Feldman, H.A.; O’Hara-Tompkins, N.; Nader, P.R.; Johnson, C.C.; Stone, E.J. Measurement of self-efficacy for diet-related behaviors among elementary school children. J. Sch. Health 1995, 65, 23–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dzewaltowski, D.A.; Geller, K.S.; Rosenkranz, R.R.; Karteroliotis, K. Children’s self-efficacy and proxy efficacy for after-school physical activity. Psychol. Sport. Exerc. 2010, 11, 100–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varni, J.W.; Seid, M.; Kurtin, P.S. PedsQL 4.0: Reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 generic core scales in healthy and patient populations. Med. Care 2001, 39, 800–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fulkerson, J.A.; Nelson, M.C.; Lytle, L.; Moe, S.; Heitzler, C.; Pasch, K.E. The validation of a home food inventory. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2008, 5, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Janicke, D.M.; Lim, C.S.; Mathews, A.E.; Shelnutt, K.P.; Boggs, S.R.; Silverstein, J.H.; Brumback, B.A. The community-based healthy-lifestyle intervention for rural preschools (CHIRP) study: Design and methods. Contemp. Clin. Trials 2013, 34, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Armstrong, S.C.; Bolling, C.F.; Michalsky, M.P.; Reichard, K.W. Section on Obesity SOS. Pediatric Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: Evidence, Barriers, and Best Practices. Pediatrics 2019, 144, e20193223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bolling, C.F.; Armstrong, S.C.; Reichard, K.W.; Michalsky, M.P. Section on Obesity SOS. Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery for Pediatric Patients with Severe Obesity. Pediatrics 2019, 144, e20193224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mitchell, E.J.; Ahmed, K.; Breeman, S.; Haemer, M.A.; Muth, N.D.; Rausch, J.C.; Rogers, V.W.; Heiss, K.F.; Besner, G.E. It is unprecedented: Trial management during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Trials 2020, 21, 784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, L.R.; Sanchez, K.; da Graca, B.; Bennett, M.M.; Powers, M.; Warren, A.M. Income differences and COVID-19: Impact on daily life and mental health. Popul. Health Manag. 2022, 25, 384–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, C.A.; Ming, D.; Maslow, G.; Gifford, E.J. Mitigating the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic response on at-risk children. Pediatrics 2020, 146, e20200973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jelalian, E.; Sato, A.; Hart, C.N. The effect of group-based weight control intervention on adolescent psychosocial outcomes: Perceived peer rejection, social anxiety and self-concept. Child Health Care 2011, 40, 197–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xiang, M.; Zhang, Z.; Kuwahara, K. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents’ lifestyle behavior larger than expected. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2020, 63, 531–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grossman, D.C.; Bibbins-Domingo, K.; Curry, S.J.; Barry, M.J.; Davidson, K.W.; Doubeni, C.A.; Epling, J.W., Jr.; Kemper, A.R.; Krist, A.H.; Kurth, A.E.; et al. Screening for Obesity in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2017, 317, 2417–2426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janicke, D.M.; Steele, R.G.; Gayes, L.A.; Lim, C.S.; Clifford, L.M.; Schneider, E.M.; Carmody, J.K.; Westen, S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of comprehensive behavioral family lifestyle interventions addressing pediatric obesity. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 2014, 39, 809–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sandridge, S.; Lim, C.S.; King, K. Outcomes of the Wellness and Weight Family Group Project. In Proceedings of the ObesityWeek 2020 Interactive, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2–6 November 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Lim, C.S.; Sandridge, S.; King, K. Physical Activity and Food Environment Outcomes from a Clinic-Based Behavioral Program. In Proceedings of the ObesityWeek, San Diego, CA, USA, 1–4 November 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, A.M.; Sampilo, M.; Gallagher, K.S.; Dean, K.; Saroja, M.B.; Yu, Q.; He, J.; Sporn, N. Treating rural paediatric obesity through telemedicine vs. telephone: Outcomes from a cluster randomized controlled trial. J. Telemed. Telecare 2016, 22, 86–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Davis, A.M.; Beaver, G.; Dreyer Gillette, M.; Nelson, E.-L.; Fleming, K.; Romine, R.S.; Sullivan, D.K.; Lee, R.; Gabriel, K.P.; Dean, K.; et al. iAmHealthy: Rationale, design and application of a family-based mHealth pediatric obesity intervention for rural children. Contemp. Clin. Trials 2019, 78, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Youth Characteristics (N = 47) | Mean (SD) or n (%) |
---|---|
Age in years | 13.55 (2.21) |
Sex (% Female) | 27 (57.4%) |
BMI | 41.57 (11.41) |
BMI percentile | 99.32 (0.80) |
BMI z-score | 2.59 (0.41) |
Class of Obesity | n (%) |
Class 1 Obesity (BMI 30 to <35) | 12 (25.5%) |
Class 2 Obesity (BMI 35 to <40) | 12 (25.5%) |
Class 3 Obesity (BMI > 40) | 23 (48.9%) |
Race/Ethnicity | n (%) |
Non-Hispanic White/Caucasian | 10 (27.0%) |
Non-Hispanic Black/African American | 33 (70.2%) |
Latino/Hispanic | 3 (6.4%) |
Biracial | 1 (2.1%) |
Caregiver Characteristics (N = 45) | Mean (SD) |
Age in years | 42.25 (9.70) |
BMI (n = 35) | 37.66 (9.38) |
Relationship to Youth | n (%) |
Mother | 39 (86.7%) |
Father | 1 (2.24.1%) |
Grandmother | 4 (8.9%) |
Other | 1 (2.2%) |
Marital Status | n (%) |
Married | 16 (35.6%) |
Single/Never Married | 17 (37.8%) |
Divorced/Separated | 3 (6.7%) |
Cohabitating | 5 (11.5%) |
Widowed | 4 (8.9%) |
Annual Family Income | n (%) |
Below $9999 | 6 (13.3%) |
$10,000–$29,999 | 13 (28.9%) |
$30,000–$49,999 | 11 (24.4%) |
$50,000–$69,999 | 6 (13.3%) |
$70,000–$89,999 | 2 (4.4%) |
Above $90,000 | 7 (15.6%) |
RPMS Use Information (N = 38) | Mean (SD) | Median | Range (Min–Max) |
---|---|---|---|
Partially Completed RPMS Sessions (n = 38) | 2.76 (2.57) | 2.00 | 0–9 |
Fully Completed RPMS Sessions (n = 38) | 24.53 (22.09) | 20.50 | 0–88 |
Total RPMS Sessions Completed a (n = 38) | 27.29 (22.42) | 24.50 | 0–88 |
Youth RPMS Satisfaction (N = 29)b | Mean (SD) | Median | Range (Min–Max) |
Total Youth Satisfaction c (n = 26) | 32.88 (5.37) | 33.50 | 16–40 |
1. I liked using the RPMS. (n = 29) | 3.21 (0.94) | 3.00 | 1–4 |
2. The RPMS helped me improve my healthy habits. (n = 29) | 3.21 (0.86) | 3.00 | 1–4 |
3. It was easy to answer the questions asked by the RPMS. (n = 29) | 3.62 (0.73) | 4.00 | 1–4 |
4. I felt supported when my parent or I talked with the nurse. (n = 28) | 3.54 (0.58) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
5. The information presented was interesting. (n = 28) | 3.50 (0.84) | 4.00 | 1–4 |
6. After using the system I got along better with my parent. (n = 29) | 3.00 (1.04) | 3.00 | 1–4 |
7. Using the RPMS system was time consuming. d (n = 29) | 2.69 (1.14) | 3.00 | 1–4 |
8. I liked the graphics used in the system. (n = 29) | 3.07 (0.96) | 3.00 | 1–4 |
9. Overall, the RPMS was easy to use. (n = 27) | 3.56 (0.75) | 4.00 | 1–4 |
10. Overall, using the RPMS was positive. (n = 29) | 3.45 (0.87) | 4.00 | 1–4 |
Caregiver RPMS Satisfaction (N = 27)b | Mean (SD) | Median | Range (Min–Max) |
Total Caregiver Satisfaction e (n = 23) | 42.26 (4.39) | 42.00 | 32–48 |
1. I enjoyed viewing the educational materials in the RPMS. (n = 27) | 3.41 (0.64) | 3.00 | 2–4 |
2. Using the RPMS helped me feel responsible for my family’s lifestyle behaviors. (n = 27) | 3.30 (0.72) | 3.00 | 1–4 |
3. The RPMS made me feel that I am not alone in my family’s struggle to develop healthier lifestyles and manage weight. (n = 27) | 3.48 (0.64) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
4. I felt comfortable answering the questions asked by the RPMS. (n = 27) | 3.63 (0.56) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
5. Using the RPMS helped me learn how to overcome barriers to a healthy lifestyle. (n = 27) | 3.30 (0.61) | 3.00 | 2–4 |
6. The information presented was applicable to my child and family. (n = 27) | 3.48 (0.58) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
7. The information collected by the system (physical activity, weight) was helpful to me and my child. (n = 27) | 3.59 (0.64) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
8. Overall, I feel using the RPMS has been a positive experience. (n = 27) | 3.74 (0.45) | 4.00 | 3–4 |
9. The telehealth nurse understood the unique challenges and needs of my family in making healthy lifestyle changes. (n = 23) | 3.57 (0.59) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
10. I felt that the telehealth nurse appreciated and respected the small changes my family made while using the program. (n = 23) | 3.57 (0.59) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
11. I learned helpful ways to improve my child’s behavior while using the RPMS. (n = 27) | 3.26 (0.71) | 3.00 | 2–4 |
12. The RPMS was easy to use. (n = 27) | 3.63 (0.56) | 4.00 | 2–4 |
Pre-RPMS M (SD) | Post-RPMS M (SD) | Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Value | p-Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Youth Assessments and Questionnaires | ||||
BMI (n = 22) | 39.52 (6.63) | 40.37 (6.33) | −0.817 | 0.414 |
BMI Percentile (n = 20) | 99.13 (1.08) | 99.06 (0.68) | −1.717 | 0.086 |
BMI z-score (n = 20) | 2.48 (0.44) | 2.54 (0.32) | −0.104 | 0.918 |
Heart Rate (n = 17) | 81.24 (10.17) | 87.81 (14.89) | −1.753 | 0.080 |
Systolic Blood Pressure (n = 17) | 118.47 (11.51) | 125.76 (12.83) | −1.847 | 0.065 |
Diastolic Blood Pressure (n = 17) | 68.62 (7.37) | 73.18 (8.10) | −1.564 | 0.118 |
ASA24 dietary intake kilocalories/day (n = 14) | 1427.75 (529.50) | 1289.35 (576.01) | −0.785 | 0.433 |
Actigraph physical activity kilocalories/day (n = 15) | 384.81 (236.18) | 234.17 (215.54) | 2.442 | 0.015 * |
CDSES Total Score (n = 25) | 37.12 (6.04) | 39.24 (5.09) | −1.934 | 0.053 |
SEPAS Total Score (n = 28) | 10.32 (2.16) | 10.79 (2.61) | −0.734 | 0.463 |
PedsQL Total Score (n = 27) | 68.60 (15.64) | 74.40 (15.97) | −2.114 | 0.035 * |
Caregiver Assessments and Questionnaires | ||||
BMI (n = 12) | 36.78 (8.96) | 37.03 (9.87) | −0.078 | 0.937 |
HFI Obesogenic Home Food Availability (n = 20) | 22.80 (7.66) | 28.25 (11.89) | −1.963 | 0.050 * |
PedsQL Total Score (n = 19) | 72.31 (13.09) | 79.18 (13.12) | −1.853 | 0.064 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lim, C.S.; Dodd, C.A.; Rutledge, L.E.; Sandridge, S.W.; King, K.B.; Jefferson, D.J.; Tucker, T. Usability and Satisfaction Outcomes from a Pilot Open Trial Examining Remote Patient Monitoring to Treat Pediatric Obesity during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 2373. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032373
Lim CS, Dodd CA, Rutledge LE, Sandridge SW, King KB, Jefferson DJ, Tucker T. Usability and Satisfaction Outcomes from a Pilot Open Trial Examining Remote Patient Monitoring to Treat Pediatric Obesity during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(3):2373. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032373
Chicago/Turabian StyleLim, Crystal S., Cameronne A. Dodd, Laura E. Rutledge, Shanda W. Sandridge, Krista B. King, Darryl J. Jefferson, and Tanya Tucker. 2023. "Usability and Satisfaction Outcomes from a Pilot Open Trial Examining Remote Patient Monitoring to Treat Pediatric Obesity during the COVID-19 Pandemic" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 3: 2373. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032373