Patient perspectives on the acceptability of mHealth technology for remote measurement and management of epilepsy: A qualitative analysis
Abstract
Background Innovative uses of mobile health (mHealth) technology for real-time measurement and management of epilepsy may improve the care provided to patients. For instance, seizure detection and quantifying related problems will have an impact on quality of life and improve clinical management for people experiencing frequent and uncontrolled seizures. Engaging patients with mHealth technology is essential, but little is known about patient perspectives on their acceptability. The aim of this study was to conduct an in-depth qualitative analysis of what people with uncontrolled epilepsy think could be the potential uses of mHealth technology and to identify early potential barriers and facilitators to engagement in three European countries.Method Twenty people currently experiencing epileptic seizures took part in five focus groups held across the UK, Italy, and Spain. Participants all completed written consent and a demographic questionnaire prior to the focus group commencing, and each group discussion lasted 60-120 min. A coding frame, developed from a systematic review of the previous literature, was used to structure a thematic analysis. We extracted themes and subthemes from the discussions, focusing first on possible uses of mHealth and then the barriers and facilitators to engagement.Results Participants were interested in mHealth technology as a clinical detection tool, e.g., to aid communication about seizure occurrence with their doctors. Other suggested uses included being able to predict or prevent seizures, and to improve self-management. Key facilitators to engagement were the ability to raise awareness, plan activities better, and improve safety. Key barriers were the potential for increased stigma and anxiety. Using familiar and customizable products could be important moderators of engagement.Conclusion People with uncontrolled epilepsy think that there is a scope for mHealth technology to be useful in healthcare as a detection or prediction tool. The costs will be compared with the benefits when it comes to engagement, and ongoing work with patients and other stakeholders is needed to design practical resources.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The importance of integration was reflected in this study, in which perceived high effort expectancy competed with other activities, leading to forgetfulness or deprioritizing of use.
“The importance of integration is reflected in this study in which the perceived high effort expectancy of using Otis competed with other activities leading to forgetfulness or deprioritizing of use, as seen in other studies [54,55].”
From A Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Chatbot (Otis) for Health Anxiety Management: Mixed Methods Pilot Study (2022) · cites this paper as [55]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 54
- Authors
- Simblett, S. K., Bruno, E., Siddi, S., Matcham, F., Giuliano, L., López, J. H., Biondi, A., Curtis, H., Ferrão, J., Polhemus, A., Zappia, M., Callen, A., Gamble, P., & Wykes, T.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (ES)
- University of Catania (IT)
- MSD (Czech Republic) (CZ)
- Corresponding author
- Simblett, Sara K.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Epilepsy & Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-08
- Volume
- 97
- Pages
- 123-129
- ISSN
- 1525-5050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2953362801
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 9.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Epilepsy & Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
- Sackler Institute for Translational Neurodevelopment, King's College London
- Innovative Medicines Initiative (115902)
- National Institute for Health Research
- European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Keywords
- mobile health, epilepsy, patient acceptability, seizure detection, seizure prediction, self-management, barriers to engagement, stigma, anxiety, patient perspectives, uncontrolled seizures
- MeSH terms
- Self-Management, Adult, Attitude to Health, Communication, Epilepsy, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Italy, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Participation, Physician-Patient Relations, Quality of Life, Seizures, Spain, Focus Groups, Telemedicine, Disease Management, Young Adult, Grounded Theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review