Patients self-mastery of wearable devices for seizure detection: A direct user-experience

PURPOSE wearable devices aimed at detecting seizures are rapidly emerging. Continuous collection and optimal data quality are paramount to guarantee the acquisition of clinically meaningful data. It is still unknown how successfully patients can self-manage new technologies and which factors have an impact on this. We assessed the performance of patients managing a wrist-worn device. METHOD patients wearing a wrist-worn device received a single training session to perform 5 tasks: (1) fitting the device correctly; (2) switching the device on and off; (3) charging the device on a daily basis; (4) pairing the device with a phone or tablet; (5) seeking assistance. Participants were then reviewed every 24 h and, at the end of the study, a Wearable technology Self-management Score (WSS) was calculated according to their performance in the different tasks (0-12). The association between WSS, seizure capture, demographics and clinical characteristics was analysed. RESULTS Thirty patients were included. The mean WSS score was 9.4 ± 2.1 points. The task more often performed inaccurately was pairing the device with a phone or tablet, followed by performing charging procedures. A strong association was found between WSS and seizure capture (p = 0.019), with higher scores strongly associated with more seizures captured. A WSS of ≥9 was the minimum value of WSS that allowed the device to record all the seizures. Number of AEDs and illness-perception related factors (perceived disease timeline and personal control) were significantly associated with WSS. CONCLUSIONS Overall, participants demonstrated good performances in self-managing a wrist-worn device. Digital inequalities may extend to variations in how different individuals feel about their own disease and, consequently, manage the technology. These aspects should be addressed when technological solutions are delivered to users.

[1]  Michael A. Rupp,et al.  The role of individual differences on perceptions of wearable fitness device trust, usability, and motivational impact. , 2018, Applied ergonomics.

[2]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  A Fast Form Approach to Measuring Technology Acceptance and Other Constructs , 2008, MIS Q..

[3]  R. Letz,et al.  Behavioral, social, and affective factors associated with self-efficacy for self-management among people with epilepsy , 2006, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[4]  A. Schulze-Bonhage,et al.  Wearable technology in epilepsy: The views of patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals , 2018, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[5]  F. Matcham,et al.  Patient perspectives on the acceptability of mHealth technology for remote measurement and management of epilepsy: A qualitative analysis , 2019, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[6]  Johannes Van Dijk,et al.  Multimodal nocturnal seizure detection in a residential care setting , 2018, Neurology.

[7]  C. Diiorio,et al.  Epilepsy self-management: partial replication and extension. , 1994, Research in nursing & health.

[8]  M. Trimble,et al.  Depression but not seizure frequency predicts quality of life in treatment-resistant epilepsy , 2004, Neurology.

[9]  Elizabeth Broadbent,et al.  The brief illness perception questionnaire. , 2006, Journal of psychosomatic research.

[10]  M. Thompson,et al.  Seizure detection watch improves quality of life for adolescents and their families , 2019, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[11]  William O Tatum,et al.  Detection of generalized tonic–clonic seizures using surface electromyographic monitoring , 2017, Epilepsia.

[12]  Rachael C. Walker,et al.  Patient expectations and experiences of remote monitoring for chronic diseases: Systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies , 2019, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[13]  J. Britton,et al.  Patient and caregiver view on seizure detection devices: A survey study , 2016, Seizure.

[14]  T. Wykes,et al.  Do We Still Have a Digital Divide in Mental Health? A Five-Year Survey Follow-up , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.

[15]  Christian E. Elger,et al.  Novel techniques for automated seizure registration: Patients' wants and needs , 2015, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[16]  C. Diiorio,et al.  Epilepsy self-management: a test of a theoretical model. , 1996, Nursing research.

[17]  Anup D. Patel,et al.  Seizure detection devices and health-related quality of life: A patient- and caregiver-centered evaluation , 2020, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[18]  M. Richardson,et al.  Patients' experience of wearing multimodal sensor devices intended to detect epileptic seizures: A qualitative analysis , 2019, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[19]  R. Faught,et al.  The relationship of depression to antiepileptic drug adherence and quality of life in epilepsy , 2014, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[20]  Sándor Beniczky,et al.  User‐based evaluation of applicability and usability of a wearable accelerometer device for detecting bilateral tonic–clonic seizures: A field study , 2018, Epilepsia.

[21]  R. Shegog,et al.  Self‐management for adults with epilepsy: Aggregate Managing Epilepsy Well Network findings on depressive symptoms , 2019, Epilepsia.