Consumers' Preferences for Purchasing MHealth Apps: Discrete Choice Experiment

Overview

Journal JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Medical Informatics

Date 2023 Sep 14

PMID 37707310

Authors

Zhenzhen Xie

Calvin Kalun Or

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: There is growing interest in mobile health apps; however, not all of them have been successful. The most common issue has been users' nonadoption or abandonment of health apps because the app designs do not meet their preferences. Therefore, to facilitate design-preference fit, understanding consumers' preferences for health apps is necessary, which can be accomplished by using a discrete choice experiment.

Objective: This study aims to examine consumer preferences for health apps and how these preferences differ across individuals with different sociodemographic characteristics and health app usage and purchase experiences.

Methods: A cross-sectional discrete choice experiment questionnaire survey was conducted with 593 adults living in Hong Kong. A total of 7 health app attributes that might affect consumers' preferences for health apps were examined, including usefulness, ease of use, security and privacy, health care professionals' attitudes, smartphone storage consumption, mobile data consumption, and cost. Mixed-effect logit regressions were used to examine how these attributes affected consumer preferences for health apps. Fixed effects (coefficient β) of the attributes and random effects of individual differences were modeled. Subgroup analyses of consumer preferences by sex, age, household income, education level, and health app usage and purchase experiences were conducted.

Results: Cost was the attribute that had the greatest effect on consumers' choice of health apps (compared to HK $10 [US $1.27]-HK $50 [US $6.37]: β=-1.064; P<.001; HK $100 [US $12.75]: β=-2.053; P<.001), followed by security and privacy (compared to no security insurance-some security policies: β=.782; P<.001; complete security system: β=1.164; P<.001) and usefulness (compared to slightly useful-moderately useful: β=.234; P<.001; very useful: β=.979; P=.007), mobile data consumption (compared to data-consuming-a bit data-consuming: β=.647; P<.001; data-saving: β=.815; P<.001), smartphone storage consumption (compared to >100 MB-around 38 MB: β=.334; P<.001; <10 MB: β=.511; P<.001), and attitudes of health care professionals (compared to neutral-moderately supportive: β=.301; P<.001; very supportive: β=.324; P<.001). In terms of ease of use, consumers preferred health apps that were moderately easy to use (compared to not easy to use-moderately easy to use: β=.761; P<.001; very easy to use: β=.690; P<.001). Our results also showed that consumers with different sociodemographic characteristics and different usage and purchase experiences with health apps differed in their preferences for health apps.

Conclusions: It is recommended that future health apps keep their mobile data and phone storage consumption low, include a complete security system to protect personal health information, provide useful content and features, adopt user-friendly interfaces, and involve health care professionals. In addition, health app developers should identify the characteristics of their intended users and design and develop health apps to fit the preferences of the intended users.

References

Chan K, Leung W, Tiwari A, Or K, Ip P . Using Smartphone-Based Psychoeducation to Reduce Postnatal Depression Among First-Time Mothers: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(5):e12794. PMC: 6537506. DOI: 10.2196/12794. View

Yan M, Or C . Factors in the 4-week Acceptance of a Computer-Based, Chronic Disease Self-Monitoring System in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and/or Hypertension. Telemed J E Health. 2017; 24(2):121-129. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2017.0064. View

Liu K, Or C, So M, Cheung B, Chan B, Tiwari A . A longitudinal examination of tablet self-management technology acceptance by patients with chronic diseases: Integrating perceived hand function, perceived visual function, and perceived home space adequacy with the TAM and TPB. Appl Ergon. 2021; 100:103667. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103667. View

Bidmon S, Terlutter R, Rottl J . What explains usage of mobile physician-rating apps? Results from a web-based questionnaire. J Med Internet Res. 2014; 16(6):e148. PMC: 4071227. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.3122. View

Simblett S, Greer B, Matcham F, Curtis H, Polhemus A, Ferrao J . Barriers to and Facilitators of Engagement With Remote Measurement Technology for Managing Health: Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Findings. J Med Internet Res. 2018; 20(7):e10480. PMC: 6062692. DOI: 10.2196/10480. View

Xie Z, Chen J, Or C . Consumers' Willingness to Pay for eHealth and Its Influencing Factors: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2022; 24(9):e25959. PMC: 9520394. DOI: 10.2196/25959. View

Abelson J, Kaufman E, Symer M, Peters A, Charlson M, Yeo H . Barriers and benefits to using mobile health technology after operation: A qualitative study. Surgery. 2017; 162(3):605-611. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2017.05.007. View

Velu A, van Beukering M, Schaafsma F, Frings-Dresen M, Mol B, van der Post J . Barriers and Facilitators for the Use of a Medical Mobile App to Prevent Work-Related Risks in Pregnancy: A Qualitative Analysis. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017; 6(8):e163. PMC: 5585593. DOI: 10.2196/resprot.7224. View

Clark M, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob E . Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014; 32(9):883-902. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x. View

10.

Or C, Karsh B . A systematic review of patient acceptance of consumer health information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009; 16(4):550-60. PMC: 2705259. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2888. View

11.

Fisher J, Clayton M . Who gives a tweet: assessing patients' interest in the use of social media for health care. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2012; 9(2):100-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-6787.2012.00243.x. View

12.

Heitmueller A, Henderson S, Warburton W, Elmagarmid A, Pentland A, Darzi A . Developing public policy to advance the use of big data in health care. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014; 33(9):1523-30. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0771. View

13.

Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob E, Ellis A, Vass C . Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018; 37(2):201-226. PMC: 6386055. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2. View

14.

Schnall R, Higgins T, Brown W, Carballo-Dieguez A, Bakken S . Trust, Perceived Risk, Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness as Factors Related to mHealth Technology Use. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015; 216:467-71. PMC: 5588863. View

15.

Krebs P, Duncan D . Health App Use Among US Mobile Phone Owners: A National Survey. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015; 3(4):e101. PMC: 4704953. DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.4924. View

16.

Jones R, Ashurst E, Trappes-Lomax T . Searching for a sustainable process of service user and health professional online discussions to facilitate the implementation of e-health. Health Informatics J. 2015; 22(4):948-961. DOI: 10.1177/1460458215599024. View

17.

Kayser L, Kushniruk A, Osborne R, Norgaard O, Turner P . Enhancing the Effectiveness of Consumer-Focused Health Information Technology Systems Through eHealth Literacy: A Framework for Understanding Users' Needs. JMIR Hum Factors. 2016; 2(1):e9. PMC: 4797661. DOI: 10.2196/humanfactors.3696. View

18.

Cheung D, Or C, So M, Ho K, Tiwari A . The Use of eHealth Applications in Hong Kong: Results of a Random-Digit Dialing Survey. J Med Syst. 2019; 43(9):293. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-019-1422-2. View

19.

Crutchfield T, Kistler C . Getting patients in the door: medical appointment reminder preferences. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017; 11:141-150. PMC: 5279837. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S117396. View

20.

Kanya L, Sanghera S, Lewin A, Fox-Rushby J . The criterion validity of willingness to pay methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence. Soc Sci Med. 2019; 232:238-261. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.04.015. View