An interventional study of Mobile application in Chronic Disease and Rheumatic Diseases, sponsored by Oslo University Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Norway. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 100 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-11-16.
Sponsored by Oslo University Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Device feasibility
Self-management of chronic illness can be highly demanding and people need to mobilize their personal strengths in order to live well with their condition. A mobile application was designed in collaboration with people with chronic illness and health care providers with the aims to support awareness of patients' strengths and patient-provider dialogues that include strengths. The aim of the present study is to evaluate with mixed methods the perceived usefulness and usability of the application and potential effects of the application on patients.
In this pre-post design pilot study participants will be recruited from self-management courses for people with rheumatic diseases. Before using the application participants will be asked to report their strengths in a written format. After using the mobile application to reflect on their strengths the participants will be interviewed about their experience of using the application and on the task of reflecting on their strengths. They will also be asked to fill out a questionnaire on perceived usefulness and user-friendliness. Before and after using the application the participants fill out questionnaires on emotions (Positive and Negative Affective Scale) and self-efficacy (The Arthritis Self-efficacy Scale). All interviews will be audio-taped and analyzed with a qualitative approach. Descriptive analysis will be applied for quantitative data.
264 studies on the registry are indexed under Rheumatic Diseases; 60 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 12 is below the median of 100 across 167 interventional studies indexed under Rheumatic Diseases.
Browse Rheumatic Diseases studies →Oslo University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 834 studies on the registry; 149 are open to participants now.
Compared within Rheumatic Diseases, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Chronic Disease. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →
Setting 1:
Inclusion Criteria:
No exclusion criteria
Participants recruited from a self-management course are asked to use (single time) a mobile application to support reflection of personal strengths. The participant borrows an Ipad and uses the application to 1) reflect and identify their strengths by reviewing a list of examples, 2) define personal goals, and 3) link strengths to goals.
Device: Mobile application
Use of a mobile application (on a borrowed device) with following features: 1) strengths reflection and identification, 2) summary of registered strengths, 3) defining goals, and 4) linking strengths to goals.
Perceived Usefulness of the Application
Study-specific questions on perceived usefulness of the application
Time frame: Within an hour after using the application
The System Usability Scale
This 10 item questionnaire measures usability. Each item has 5 response options with total score ranging from 0 to 100. Higher values represent a better outcome.
Time frame: Within an hour after using the application
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule.
This scale measures positive and negative affect with two subscales (positive affect and negative affect). Positive affect subscale scores can range from 10-50, with higher scores representing higher levels of positive affect. Negative affect subscale scores can range from 10-50, with lower scores representing lower levels of negative affect.
Time frame: Pre-intervention and post-intervention, within an hour after using the application
The Arthritis Self-efficacy Scale
This scale measures self-efficacy with two subscales with 5 response options. The "pain" subscale has 5 items and a score range from 0 to 20. The "other symptoms" subscale has 6 items and a score range from 0 to 24. Higher scores equal higher levels of self-efficacy.
Time frame: Pre-intervention and post-intervention, within an hour after using the application
| Milestone | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| Started | 12 |
| Completed | 12 |
| Not completed | 0 |
Study-specific questions on perceived usefulness of the application
| Participants | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| It was meaningful and relevant to use the app — Agree or strongly agree | 12 |
| It was meaningful and relevant to use the app — Disagree or strongly disagree | 0 |
| It was meaningful and relevant to use the app — Neutral | 0 |
| It was meaningful and relevant to use the app — Mssing | 0 |
| I became more aware of my own strengths by using the app — Agree or strongly agree | 9 |
| I became more aware of my own strengths by using the app — Disagree or strongly disagree | 1 |
| I became more aware of my own strengths by using the app — Neutral | 2 |
| I became more aware of my own strengths by using the app — Mssing | 0 |
| It was useful for me to see an overview of my own strengths — Agree or strongly agree | 10 |
| It was useful for me to see an overview of my own strengths — Disagree or strongly disagree | 0 |
| It was useful for me to see an overview of my own strengths — Neutral | 2 |
| It was useful for me to see an overview of my own strengths — Mssing | 0 |
| It was useful for me to be able to register a goal — Agree or strongly agree | 5 |
| It was useful for me to be able to register a goal — Disagree or strongly disagree | 2 |
| It was useful for me to be able to register a goal — Neutral | 4 |
| It was useful for me to be able to register a goal — Mssing | 1 |
| It was useful for me to be able to link the strengths to concrete goals — Agree or strongly agree | 6 |
| It was useful for me to be able to link the strengths to concrete goals — Disagree or strongly disagree | 0 |
| It was useful for me to be able to link the strengths to concrete goals — Neutral | 5 |
| It was useful for me to be able to link the strengths to concrete goals — Mssing | 1 |
| I liked the possibility to register my own notes — Agree or strongly agree | 7 |
| I liked the possibility to register my own notes — Disagree or strongly disagree | 0 |
| I liked the possibility to register my own notes — Neutral | 4 |
| I liked the possibility to register my own notes — Mssing | 1 |
| For me it would be relevant to share the overview of my strengths with my healthcare provider — Agree or strongly agree | 8 |
| For me it would be relevant to share the overview of my strengths with my healthcare provider — Disagree or strongly disagree | 0 |
| For me it would be relevant to share the overview of my strengths with my healthcare provider — Neutral | 4 |
| For me it would be relevant to share the overview of my strengths with my healthcare provider — Mssing | 0 |
| It was boring to use the app — Agree or strongly agree | 2 |
| It was boring to use the app — Disagree or strongly disagree | 9 |
| It was boring to use the app — Neutral | 1 |
| It was boring to use the app — Mssing | 0 |
| It was demanding for me to use the app — Agree or strongly agree | 1 |
| It was demanding for me to use the app — Disagree or strongly disagree | 11 |
| It was demanding for me to use the app — Neutral | 0 |
| It was demanding for me to use the app — Mssing | 0 |
| I would like to have the app on my own mobile devise — Agree or strongly agree | 7 |
| I would like to have the app on my own mobile devise — Disagree or strongly disagree | 2 |
| I would like to have the app on my own mobile devise — Neutral | 3 |
| I would like to have the app on my own mobile devise — Mssing | 0 |
| I would recommend the app to others in my situation — Agree or strongly agree | 9 |
| I would recommend the app to others in my situation — Disagree or strongly disagree | 0 |
| I would recommend the app to others in my situation — Neutral | 3 |
| I would recommend the app to others in my situation — Mssing | 0 |
This 10 item questionnaire measures usability. Each item has 5 response options with total score ranging from 0 to 100. Higher values represent a better outcome.
| score on a scale | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| The System Usability Scale | 86.3 (70 to 100) |
This scale measures positive and negative affect with two subscales (positive affect and negative affect). Positive affect subscale scores can range from 10-50, with higher scores representing higher levels of positive affect. Negative affect subscale scores can range from 10-50, with lower scores representing lower levels of negative affect.
| score on a scale | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| Positive emotion sub scale (pre-intervention) | 34.0 (31.0 to 46.0) |
| Positive emotion sub scale (post-intervention) | 35.0 (28.0 to 45.0) |
| Negative emotion subscale (pre-intervention) | 12.0 (10.0 to 23.0) |
| Negative emotion (post-intervention) | 11.0 (10.0 to 16.0) |
This scale measures self-efficacy with two subscales with 5 response options. The "pain" subscale has 5 items and a score range from 0 to 20. The "other symptoms" subscale has 6 items and a score range from 0 to 24. Higher scores equal higher levels of self-efficacy.
| score on a scale | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| Pain sub scale (pre-intervention) | 12.0 (5.0 to 16.0) |
| Pain sub scale (post-intervention) | 14.0 (6.0 to 17.0) |
| Other symptoms sub scale (pre-intervention) | 16.0 (8.0 to 22.0) |
| Other symptoms subscale (post-intervention) | 17.0 (10.0 to 22.0) |
Collected over Within about 1 hour from testing the application.. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile Application | 0/12 (0%) | 0/12 (0%) | 0/12 (0%) |
| Age, Continuous(years) | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| Median | 50.0 (30 to 76) |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | Mobile Application |
|---|---|
| Female | 11 |
| Male | 1 |
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants) | Mobile Application |
|---|
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: No
Ran from Apr 2018 to primary completion in Sep 2018, 5 months.
Results were first posted in Nov 2021, 3 years 1 month after primary completion.
Of 72 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Rheumatic Diseases, half reached primary completion within 26 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 46. This study's 5 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 74 studies reached it within 26 months; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 46.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.