The Use of Sensors to Detect Anxiety for In-the-Moment Intervention: Scoping Review

Abstract

Background With anxiety a growing issue and barriers to accessing support services, there is a need for innovative solutions to provide early intervention. In-the-moment interventions support individuals to recognize early signs of distress and use coping mechanisms to prevent or manage this distress. There is potential for wearable sensors linked to an individual’s mobile phone to provide in-the-moment support tailored to individual needs and physiological responses. Objective The aim of this scoping review is to examine the role of sensors in detecting the physiological signs of anxiety to initiate and direct interventions for its management. Methods Relevant studies were identified through searches conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, ProQuest, and Scopus. Studies were identified if they were conducted with people with stress or anxiety or at risk of anxiety and included a wearable sensor providing real-time data for in-the-moment management of anxiety. Results Of the 1087 studies identified, 11 studies were included in the review, including 5 randomized controlled trials and 6 pilot or pretesting studies. The results showed that most studies successfully demonstrated improvements in their target variables. This included overall anxiety and stress levels, and the implementation of in-the-moment stress and anxiety management techniques such as diaphragmatic breathing. There was wide variation in the types of sensors used, physiological measures, and sensor-linked interventions. Conclusions This review indicates that sensors are potentially a useful tool in detecting anxiety and facilitating the implementation of a known control mechanism to reduce anxiety and improve mood, but further work is needed to understand the acceptability and effectiveness of this type of intervention.

Asynchronous Technologies in Mental Health Care and Education

“…Research and development must focus on establishing practical infrastructures so that the ecosystem of health care providers, collaborating partners, and independent developers can design, provide, and reuse quality services within a reliable and secure environment [ 78 ]. Most importantly, the design of digital health software tools must use patient and clinician input regarding the role of technology in the care continuum [ 37 •, 69 , 79 – 81 ]. Several articles [ 82 , 83 ] have discussed recent trends in changing attitudes of patients and clinicians in the use of technology for their health.…”

“…While 4 of the RCT studies found significant improvements to measure anxiety, 1 actually concluded that sensors may impede efficacy when combined with an online intervention for stress, which was potentially due to technical issues. This review identified that wearable sensors can implement successful in-the-moment stress and anxiety management techniques such as diaphragmatic breathing [ 69 ].…”

Exploring patient perspectives on the secondary use of their personal health information: an interview study

“…As previous studies, and our earlier surveys, have highlighted, the support for the secondary use of health information is conditional. [5][6][7]15] Key conditions for patient support of secondary use of health information include the use being for the greater good and that they can trust their health service (or those who collected the data) to protect and care for their health information. Not only is it paramount that the secondary use of health information is for the direct purpose of benefiting others, but there also needs to be assurances that its use will not result in immediate or secondary harm.…”

“…Previous work in NZ has shown that both patients and the general public are largely comfortable with the secondary use of their de-identified health information. [6,15] A survey of 1,377 current patients found that over 80% were comfortable with their health information being used across a range of scenarios. Comfort with the use of individual health information was related to assurances that its use was for public good, data was stored securely, individual privacy was maintained, and there was communication on how it was used.…”

“…[6] The same survey administered to a general public cohort (rather than current patients of a health service; n = 2,572) found similar results with levels of comfort also being dependent on data not being shared outside the health system or used for commercial gain. [15] Both surveys highlighted that there was a current lack of communication and transparency around health information use.…”