Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Family-Centered Technology in Complex Care: Feasibility Study
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: Care coordination is challenging but crucial for children with medical complexity (CMC). Technology-based solutions are increasingly prevalent but little is known about how to successfully deploy them in the care of CMC.
Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of GoalKeeper (GK), an internet-based system for eliciting and monitoring family-centered goals for CMC, and to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation.
Methods: We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to explore the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of GK as part of a clinical trial of GK in ambulatory clinics at a children's hospital (NCT03620071). The study was conducted in 3 phases: preimplementation, implementation (trial), and postimplementation. For the trial, we recruited providers at participating clinics and English-speaking parents of CMC<12 years of age with home internet access. All participants used GK during an initial clinic visit and for 3 months after. We conducted preimplementation focus groups and postimplementation semistructured exit interviews using the CFIR interview guide. Participant exit surveys assessed GK feasibility and acceptability on a 5-point Likert scale. For each interview, 3 independent coders used content analysis and serial coding reviews based on the CFIR qualitative analytic plan and assigned quantitative ratings to each CFIR construct (-2 strong barrier to +2 strong facilitator).
Results: Preimplementation focus groups included 2 parents (1 male participant and 1 female participant) and 3 providers (1 in complex care, 1 in clinical informatics, and 1 in neurology). From focus groups, we developed 3 implementation strategies: education (parents: 5-minute demo; providers: 30-minute tutorial and 5-minute video on use in a clinic visit; both: instructional manual), tech support (in-person, virtual), and automated email reminders for parents. For implementation (April 1, 2019, to December 21, 2020), we enrolled 11 providers (7 female participants, 5 in complex care) and 35 parents (mean age 38.3, SD 7.8 years; n=28, 80% female; n=17, 49% Caucasian; n=16, 46% Hispanic; and n=30, 86% at least some college). One parent-provider pair did not use GK in the clinic visit, and few used GK after the visit. In 18 parent and 9 provider exit interviews, the key facilitators were shared goal setting, GK's internet accessibility and email reminders (parents), and GK's ability to set long-term goals and use at the end of visits (providers). A key barrier was GK's lack of integration into the electronic health record or patient portal. Most parents (13/19) and providers (6/9) would recommend GK to their peers.
Conclusions: Family-centered technologies like GK are feasible and acceptable for the care of CMC, but sustained use depends on integration into electronic health records.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03620071; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03620071.
Elkourdi F, Asan O JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2025; 8:e67289.
PMID: 39928943 PMC: 11851040. DOI: 10.2196/67289.
Current Implementation of Digital Health in Chronic Disease Management: Scoping Review.
Pong C, Tseng R, Tham Y, Lum E J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e53576.
PMID: 39666972 PMC: 11671791. DOI: 10.2196/53576.
Shahil-Feroz A, Riaz A, Yasmin H, Saleem S, Bhutta Z, Seto E Digit Health. 2024; 10:20552076241292682.
PMID: 39659397 PMC: 11629423. DOI: 10.1177/20552076241292682.
Byams V, Baker J, Bailey C, Connell N, Creary M, Curtis R Expert Rev Hematol. 2023; 16(sup1):87-106.
PMID: 36920863 PMC: 11075128. DOI: 10.1080/17474086.2023.2183836.
Robinson F, Wilkes S, Schaefer N, Goldstein M, Rice M, Gray J Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2023; 14:20420986221146418.
PMID: 36861041 PMC: 9969430. DOI: 10.1177/20420986221146418.