Back

Dolodoc, a mobile application for the self-management of chronic pain: Acceptability and usability study

Guebey, J.; Gosetto, L.; Rehberg-Klug, B.; Lovis, C.; Ehrler, F.; Molinard-Chenu, A.

2025-10-31 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2025.10.28.25338623 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundApproximately 19% of adults in Europe are affected by chronic pain, which reduces quality of life. Pain management apps (mHealth) offer a promising solution for self-management, but users engagement and adherence can be a limitation to their clinical impact. User experience design and studies play an important role in optimizing usability and long-term adoption of digital health interventions. ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the user experience of Dolodoc, a mobile application for chronic pain self-management, using a mixed-methods approach that evaluates acceptability through a content quality survey and examines usability by analyzing overall usage patterns. MethodsA cross-sectional acceptability study was conducted among chronic pain patients recruited from the Geneva University Hospitals pain center and through snowball sampling. Participants rated 84 evidence-based self-management strategies using a five-point Likert scale based on 5 acceptability criterias: understandability, motivation, feasibility, relevance, and alignment with the related quality-of-life dimension. Usability was assessed through usage metrics that were collected over six months using Piwik PRO analytics to observe the usage behaviors of real-world Dolodoc users. ResultsIn the acceptability study, a total of 33 participants rated the self-management strategies positively across all dimensions. On a scale from -2 to 2, the strategies were well understood (mean = 1,47), motivational (1.12), feasible(1.01), relevant (0.99), and aligned with the dimensions (1.33). The usability study demonstrated that 60% of patients used Dolodoc only once, indicating that long-term adherence remains a challenge. Within Dolodoc, pain tracking, useful links and medication logging were the most actively used features. DiscussionThis study highlights the gap between acceptability and long-term adherence to mHealth solutions. Improving personalization and accessibility could increase user engagement and long-term adherence. Future iterations of the app should incorporate tailored interventions and real-time feedback mechanisms. In addition, taking advantage of a digital navigation follow-up could facilitate user adoption and sustained engagement.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
26.6%
2
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.6%
3
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.6%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 23%
7.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.4%
6
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.0%
7
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.0%
8
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
9
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
10
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.8%
11
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
12
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
13
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
14
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
15
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
16
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 65%
1.3%
18
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
19
Archives of Public Health
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
20
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
22
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
24
European Journal of Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
25
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
26
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%