ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

Abstract Number: 2383

A Qualitative Study of Barriers and Facilitators to Arthritis Patients Use of Physical Activity Monitoring Tools

Jenny Leese1,2, Bao Chau Tran1, Catherine Backman3, Anne F. Townsend4, Aileen Davis5, Allyson Jones6, Diane Gromala7, J Antonio Avina-Zubieta8 and Linda Li9, 1Arthritis Research Canada, Richmond, BC, Canada, 2Rehabilitation Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3Occup Science & OccupTherapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 4Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 5Health Care and Outcomes Rsrch, Toronto Western Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada, 6Rehabilitation Medicine, Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 7Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 8Medicine, University of British Columbia, Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 9Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Meeting: 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 29, 2015

Keywords: , ,

Session Information

Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Title: Orthopedics, Low Back Pain and Rehabilitation Poster (ARHP): Rehabilitation Sciences

Session Type: ACR Poster Session C

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Physical activity participation can reduce pain, improve mobility and enhance quality of life in people with arthritis.[1] Despite these benefits, it was reported in the 2011 Canadian Community Health Survey that less than half of Canadians with arthritis are physically active.[2] While emerging evidence supports the use of some wearable physical activity monitoring tools to support an active lifestyle among patients with chronic diseases, little is known about how to integrate wearable tools to support self-management.[3] We aimed to examine the barriers and facilitators to using these wearable tools from the perspectives of arthritis patients.

 
Methods: Patient focus groups were conducted within a larger project that aimed to examine the context of using wearable physical activity monitoring tools to support arthritis self-management. To be eligible, patients had 1) a diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) and/or any type of inflammatory arthritis (IA), 2) any level of experience with wearable physical activity monitoring tools, and 3) were English-speaking. Participants were recruited via notices in hospitals and clinics of rheumatologists and rehabilitation professionals, and via online ads. An iterative, thematic analysis approach using constant comparative methods was applied to the data. 

Results: In 2014 – 2015, 40 patients (31 women; 9 men) took part in 9 focus groups in-person or by teleconference. Of the 37 participants who provided information, 29 had used a wearable physical activity monitoring tool in the past. 17 (46%) had OA, 13 (35%) had IA, and 7 (19%) had OA and IA. Focus groups ranged from 3-6 participants, and the median age was 59 years (range: 23 –78). Preliminary findings revealed key barriers to patients’ use of online physical activity monitors, which included: 1) an unfamiliarity with the tools, 2) a concern that the tool may be too expensive, and 3) doubts that use of the tool would be sustainable. If use was to be sustained, participants identified the importance of a tool that was user-friendly and provided information that was meaningful to their individual circumstance. Key facilitators were identified as: 1) an existing level of motivation to try out ways to be more active; 2) ease of use of the tool; 3) ongoing support from health professionals to use the tool optimally.

Conclusion: Participants identified the accessibility of wearable physical activity monitoring tools and the prospect of their long-term use as hurdles for using wearables activity monitors. The patients’ perspective has also highlighted the importance of tool design and health professional support in facilitating ongoing use of these tools. These findings provide an important first step to informing future implementation strategies for patients to use wearable physical activity monitoring tools in supporting self-management.

  1. Ottawa Panel. American Physical Therapy Association 2005; (85):907-971.

  2. Health Council of Canada. Canadian Health Care Matters 2011.

  3. Bravata DM et al. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007; (298):2296-2304.

Disclosure: J. Leese, None; B. C. Tran, None; C. Backman, None; A. F. Townsend, None; A. Davis, None; A. Jones, None; D. Gromala, None; J. A. Avina-Zubieta, None; L. Li, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Leese J, Tran BC, Backman C, Townsend AF, Davis A, Jones A, Gromala D, Avina-Zubieta JA, Li L. A Qualitative Study of Barriers and Facilitators to Arthritis Patients Use of Physical Activity Monitoring Tools [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015; 67 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-qualitative-study-of-barriers-and-facilitators-to-arthritis-patients-use-of-physical-activity-monitoring-tools/. Accessed .

« Back to 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-qualitative-study-of-barriers-and-facilitators-to-arthritis-patients-use-of-physical-activity-monitoring-tools/