7 General Discussion 135 (Cronholm, 2009), considerations such as usability extend beyond just the product or intervention; they are equally crucial when developing guidelines. Guideline developers must have a deep understanding of potential designers’ needs, barriers, skills, and knowledge. Similarly, the process of creating guidelines mirrors that of developing interventions in many ways as both require a nuanced approach that prioritizes user needs and usability to ensure effectiveness. 7.3 Part C – Application cycle: Applying the Inclusive Health Guide in cardiac rehabilitation. 7.3.1 Main findings After developing the IeG, we proceeded to apply this tool in a real-world context, as detailed in Chapter 5. Specifically, we engaged in a design process to develop a tailored eHealth intervention for people with a low SEP in the context of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). The resulting eHealth intervention aims to provide tailored support to the target group during their waiting period preceding CR by providing three types of communication: introductory videos from rehabilitation experts to inform and guide patients, audio narratives from previous patients to offer relatable experiences and emotional support, and practical advice to encourage safe health-promoting activities during the waiting period. Applying the IeG in this case study uncovered several key lessons learned. These insights offer practical considerations for effectively implementing the guide’s recommendations. Regarding the design process, we discovered the importance of resource management and participatory methods to facilitate many of the IeG’s other recommendations. Regarding the intervention design, personalization and simplicity were identified as crucial factors. In the subsequent feasibility study, as presented in Chapter 6, we evaluated the adherence and acceptance of the eHealth intervention and explored its effect on feelings of certainty and guidance and drop-out rates. The study showed encouraging adherence and acceptance of the intervention. While the quantitative analysis revealed no effects on feelings of certainty and guidance and dropout rates, qualitative feedback suggested that the intervention provided certainty during the waiting period and clarity about the upcoming CR. A commonly cited area for improvement was the demand for more personalized and extensive content. While this was only the initial iteration of our eHealth intervention, its successful adoption and acceptance among our target demographic underscores its potential.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw