Skip to main content

How Does Monitoring Help?

 

Sensor devices such as activity monitors, heart rate monitors, sleep trackers, continuous glucose monitors, and even noise or light sensors, are increasingly becoming part of routine health care. There are of course still significant technical challenges: How does a continuous stream of everyday observations get integrated into one's electronic medical record? How does it get processed into a form that clinicians can use? What are the algorithms that turn data into information for the end users of these devices, and are they accurate? Is advice based on these observations reliable? Does it ultimately help to treat or prevent health problems for the people who use the devices? 

Despite these open questions, monitoring devices are becoming more varied and feature-rich every day, and we can expect their use to continue growing. In the current blog post, then, I will consider monitoring devices from a psychological perspective. My question of interest is not whether the devices help people (the average patient seems relatively convinced that they do). Instead, I'm interested in how sensor devices might help people to improve their health -- the various possible mechanisms of action by which using a sensor device might lead someone to health behavior change. To consider this question I will rely on a relatively simple example of health sensors: the MEMS cap. MEMS (Medication Event Monitoring System) are large plastic caps that get screwed on to the top of a pill bottle -- see the image above. MEMS caps record a series of date/time stamps, which allow one to infer the pattern of times when someone opened the bottle to take their medication. People who use MEMS or other electronic monitoring devices tend to have better adherence, at least for a little while. 

Why should that be the case? All the device is doing is to track someone's medication use. It doesn't include alarms, or text notifications, or other features that might directly remind people to take their medication. Its effect is therefore entirely psychological. Here are some ways in which it might help:

1. When you give someone a monitoring device, it can make them start to pay more attention to their own behavior. Mere attention can have strong effects, because it brings things to people's awareness that they didn't notice previously. Simply paying attention to something can also increase someone's level of motivation to change it. Essentially, the behavior becomes something that they are thinking about, rather than something that was unconscious or invisible to them.

2. If the device lets you see your own data, that can enhance the effect of attention. Again, viewing your results can help you to be aware of patterns or make you more conscientious about things that were previously outside your awareness. Providing people with their own data is the first step in implementing gamification strategies like streak tracking or badges, but it can be beneficial even without those additions.

3. When people know someone else is paying attention to their behavior, they tend to behave differently. This is called a monitoring effect or a measurement effect. Knowing that someone else is paying attention to you can have a powerful motivating effect, making you want to please them. 

4. If health care providers have new information about their patients' behavior, they may change their clinical approach. For example, knowing that a patient is taking their medication consistently without any benefit may lead the prescriber to change the treatment plan or increase the dose. That's different from what they might have done if they suspected that the treatment wasn't working because of patient nonadherence. 

Starting from these monitoring basics, one can add many different enhancements. Besides the various gamification strategies, it's possible to provide tailored messages to patients. These messages can themselves affect behavior via different pathways, such as direct information to increase patients' knowledge, motivational messages to increase their readiness for change, or feedback about their progress toward health goals over time. Alternately, the pathway summarizing sensor data for healthcare providers can feed into decision support algorithms that recommend specific evidence-based changes in treatment, or even suggest evidence-based ways to interact with patients in support of behavior change (e.g., motivational interviewing). And more sophisticated sensors than MEMS provide correspondingly more options, e.g. based on combining data from movement, heart rate, noise, and temperature sensors. All of these options build on each other to create a health care system that is more individualized and responsive to patients' needs, while also offering patients needed scaffolding to change their own health behaviors.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What Years of Anxiety Taught Me About Balancing Two Minds

  Guest post by Dr. Britt Ritchie, DNP, PMHNP-BC   First, a huge thank-you to Dr. Paul Cook for inviting me to contribute here. Paul was my Division Chair when I worked at the University of Colorado (CU) as an assistant professor. During that time, he saw me at one of my most vulnerable points—grappling with anxiety so intense it almost made me abruptly quit my job. I knew it was social anxiety—the kind of fear marked by an overwhelming sense of being judged, embarrassed, or humiliated in front of others—but knowing the label didn’t make it any easier to manage in the moment. Because of that shared history, it feels especially fitting to write about my experience lecturing during my time at CU through the lens of Paul’s Two Minds Theory. I can still picture the lecture hall—the rows of students, the humming projector, the fluorescent lights that were both too hot and too bright. On paper, I was prepared. I had spent hours rehearsing, editing slides, and reviewing notes. ...

In Pursuit of Digital Badges

  What's the appeal of digital badges? I used to think that only a crazy person would be motivated to exercise just to move some electrons around on their smartphone screen. My phone would notify me that a new challenge was available each month, and I would routinely ignore it. I felt no pain or consternation about this -- in fact, I never gave it a second thought, or never notice the challenge at all. But for the past few months it seems that I'm among those who increase their activity level just because their iPhone tells them to (my latest badges shown above). Why does this seemingly stupid behavior-change strategy work, and why did it start working for me when it didn't help me before? First, it's important to know that rewards do motivate behavior. In a previous post on behaviorism I provided some background on how this works by training the Intuitive Mind. Two Minds Theory posits that the final stage before a behavior is produced by the Intuitive Mind (after proc...

Self-Determination Theory Through the Lens of Two Minds

  Self-determination theory  (SDT) is a framework for understanding human motivation. It gained a great deal of popularity as a possible explanation for the effects of motivational interviewing  (MI), although MI's primary creator William Miller has said that his understanding of MI is atheoretical . It is certainly the case that MI came about long before SDT was used to explain it. And it's also true that SDT was an established model with its own body of research before it was ever linked to MI. But Stephen Rollnick, Miller's co-author in his most important works on MI, has specifically said that he considers SDT to provide the theoretical explanation for MI's success. Deci and Ryan (2000) propose six "mini-theories" or propositions that together make up SDT: 1. intrinsic motivation  is a strong predictor of behavior, and is related to feelings of competence and autonomy. The intrinsic/extrinsic motivation distinction is an old one in psychology, reflecting ...