No abstract

Background A growing body of evidence supports the potential effectiveness of electronic health (eHealth) interventions in managing chronic pain. However, research on the needs and preferences of patients with chronic pain in relation to eHealth interventions is scarce. Eliciting user input in the development of eHealth interventions may be a crucial step toward developing meaningful interventions for patients for potentially improving treatment outcomes. Objective This study aimed to explore the experiences of patients with chronic pain with regard to information and communication technology, understand how an eHealth intervention can support the everyday needs and challenges of patients with chronic pain, and identify possible facilitators and barriers for patients’ use of an eHealth pain management intervention. Methods Twenty patients living with chronic pain and five spouses participated in individual interviews. Semistructured interview guides were used to explore participants’ needs, experiences, and challenges in daily life as well as their information and communication technology experiences and preferences for eHealth support interventions. Spouses were recruited and interviewed to gain additional insight into the patients’ needs. The study used qualitative thematic analysis. Results The participants were generally experienced technology users and reported using apps regularly. They were mainly in favor of using an eHealth self-management intervention for chronic pain and considered it a potentially acceptable way of gathering knowledge and support for pain management. The participants expressed the need for obtaining more information and knowledge, establishing a better balance in everyday life, and receiving support for improving communication and social participation. They provided suggestions for the eHealth intervention content and functionality to address these needs. Accessibility, personalization, and usability were emphasized as important elements for an eHealth support tool. The participants described an ideal eHealth intervention as one that could be used for support and distraction from pain, at any time or in any situation, regardless of varying pain intensity and concentration capacity. Conclusions This study provides insight into user preferences for eHealth interventions aiming to address self-management for chronic pain. Participants highlighted important factors to be considered when designing and developing eHealth interventions for self-management of chronic pain, illustrating the importance and benefit of including users in the development of eHealth interventions. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03705104; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03705104.

Background Chronic pain conditions are complicated and challenging to live with. Electronic health (eHealth) interventions show promise in helping people cope with chronic illness, including pain. The success of these interventions depends not only on the technology and intervention content but also on the users’ acceptance and adherence. Involving all stakeholders (eg, patients, spouses, health care providers, designers, software developers, and researchers) and exploring their input and preferences in the design and development process is an important step toward developing meaningful interventions and possibly strengthening treatment outcomes. Objective The aim of this study was to design and develop a user-centered, evidence-based eHealth self-management intervention for people with chronic pain. Methods The study employed a multidisciplinary and user-centered design approach. Overall, 20 stakeholders from the project team (ie, 7 researchers, 5 editors, 7 software developers, and 1 user representative), together with 33 external stakeholders (ie, 12 health care providers, 1 health care manger, 1 eHealth research psychologist, and 17 patients with chronic pain and 2 of their spouses) participated in a user-centered development process that included workshops, intervention content development, and usability testing. Intervention content was developed and finalized based on existing evidence, stakeholder input, and user testing. Stakeholder input was examined through qualitative analyses with rapid and in-depth analysis approaches. Results Analyses from stakeholder input identified themes including a need for reliable, trustworthy, and evidence-based content, personalization, options for feedback, behavioral tracking, and self-assessment/registration as factors to include in the intervention. Evidence-based intervention content development resulted in one face-to-face introduction session and 9 app-based educational and exercise-based modules. Usability testing provided further insight into how to optimize the design of the intervention to the user group, identifying accessibility and a simple design to be essential. Conclusions The design and development process of eHealth interventions should strive to combine well-known evidence-based concepts with stakeholder input. This study, designing and developing the pain management intervention EPIO, illustrates how a stakeholder-centered design approach can provide essential input in the development of an eHealth self-management intervention for people with chronic pain. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03705104; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03705104

Findings from the current study indicate a pattern of results similar to prior studies in which greater levels of catastrophic thinking is associated with higher perceived pain intensity whereas greater levels of acceptance relate to better functioning in activities despite chronic pain. However, in the current study, both acceptance and catastrophizing were associated with negative affect. These relationships were significant beyond the effects of clinical and demographic variables. These results support the role of pain acceptance as an important contribution to chronic pain-related outcomes alongside the well-established role of pain catastrophizing. Results are limited by reliance on self-report data, cross-sectional design, and low racial/ethnic diversity.

Employment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an indicator of post-transplantation recovery and function, with economic and social implications. As survival rates for HSCT continue to improve, greater emphasis can be placed on factors affecting the quality of post-transplantation survival, including the ability to resume employment. A sample of recipients of autologous or allogeneic HSCT was accrued (n = 1000) to complete a longitudinal lifestyle survey before transplantation and at 1 year after transplantation. The present study examines associations between employment and patient characteristics, disease variables, illness status, and quality of life among 1-year survivors (n = 702). Participants had a mean age of 55 years (range, 18 to 78) and were predominately male (59.7%), married/partnered (77.1%), and non-Hispanic Caucasian (89.5%); most (79.4%) had received autologous transplantation. Of the 690 participants reporting some form of employment before illness diagnosis, 62.4% had returned to work by 1 year after HSCT. Full-time employment at 1 year after HSCT was significantly associated with remission of illness, improved illness, fewer post-transplantation hospitalizations, less fatigue and pain, higher quality of life, and higher rating of perceived health. Those unemployed because of their health reported the highest rates of fatigue and pain and lowest quality of life, and they were most likely to report poor perceived health. These findings highlight work reintegration as an important outcome and marker of survivors' overall adjustment after transplantation. Identifying factors affecting post-transplantation employment offers opportunities for behavioral interventions to target modifiable risk factors to optimize post-transplantation survivorship, inclusive of increased rates of return to work and decreased rates of associated disability.