PDF

JMIR AGING Désormeaux-Moreau et al
Original Paper
Mobile Apps to Support Family Caregivers of People With

Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias in Managing Disruptive
Behaviors: Qualitative Study With Users Embedded in a Scoping
Review
Marjorie Désormeaux-Moreau1,2, OT, PhD; Charlie-Maude Michel1, MOT; Mélanie Vallières1, MOT; Maryse Racine1,
MOT; Myriame Poulin-Paquet1, MOT; Delphine Lacasse1, MOT; Pascale Gionet1, MOT; Melissa Genereux3,4, MD,
Msc; Wael Lachiheb5, MA; Véronique Provencher1,5, OT, PhD
1
School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
2
Institut universitaire de première ligne en santé et services sociaux, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, Centre
hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
3
Department of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
4
Public Health Directory, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke,
QC, Canada
5
Research Center on Aging, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke,
Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
Corresponding Author:
Véronique Provencher, OT, PhD
School of Rehabilitation
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Université de Sherbrooke
3001, 12 Avenue N
Sherbrooke, QC
Canada
Phone: 1 819 791 7904 ext 70525
Email: [email protected]
Abstract
Background: People with Alzheimer disease and related dementias often display disruptive behaviors (eg, aggression, wandering,
and restlessness), which increase family caregivers’ burden of care. However, there are few tools currently available to help these
caregivers manage disruptive behaviors. Mobile apps could meet this need, but to date little is known about them.
Objective: The aims of our study were to identify existing mobile apps designed to support family caregivers of people with
Alzheimer disease and related dementias in managing disruptive behaviors; explore whether family caregivers view these mobile
apps as relevant to meeting their needs and as useful in managing disruptive behaviors; and document the types of mobile apps
that are of interest and appeal to most family caregivers (with regard to format, ergonomics, and clarity).
Methods: A review of mobile apps initially conducted in February 2018 was updated in March 2019 with 2 platforms (App
Store [Apple Inc.] and Google Play [Google]). The selected apps were first analyzed independently by 3 raters (2 students and 1
researcher) for each of the platforms. A focus group discussion was then held with 4 family caregivers to explore their perceptions
of the apps according to their needs and interests. The content of the discussion was analyzed.
Results: Initially, 7 of 118 apps identified met the inclusion criteria. An eighth app, recommended by one of the knowledge
users, was added later. Four family caregivers (women aged between 58 and 78 years) participated in the discussion. Participants
expressed a preference for easy-to-understand apps that provide concrete intervention strategies. They reported being most inclined
to use two apps, Dementia Advisor and DTA Behaviours.
Conclusions: Few mobile apps on the market meet the needs of family caregivers in terms of content and usability. Our results
could help to address this gap by identifying what family caregivers deem relevant in a mobile app to help them manage disruptive
behaviors.
https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 1

(page number not for citation purposes)
XSL• FO
RenderX
(JMIR Aging 2021;4(2):e21808) doi: 10.2196/21808
KEYWORDS
disruptive behaviors management; dementia; caregivers; mobile phone; app; scoping review; focus group; mHealth; neurocognitive
disorder
estimating the probability of wandering using geolocation, as

Introduction well as facilitating care management and services by health care
Background professionals [20]. Based on data collected by the mobile device,
some apps also offer security options, such as calling emergency
Due to the aging population, an increased prevalence of services, guiding the person to a safe place (using Google
dementia is expected in many countries over the coming years navigation) or informing family caregivers of the geographic
[1]. In Canada, it is estimated that dementia will affect around location of the person with ADRD.
674,000 people by 2031, which is almost twice as much as the
number in 2011 [2]. People with Alzheimer disease and related Although several mobile apps have been designed for people
dementias (ADRD) often display disruptive behaviors, such as with ADRD, very few are specifically designed to be used by
aggression (behavioral or verbal), wandering, and agitation their family caregivers [19] with these primarily being conceived
(excessive or inappropriate verbal or motor behaviors) [3,4]. to monitor the location or activities of daily living [21] of the
About 50%-70% of the people with ADRD live at home and person with ADRD. However, family caregivers have also
require increasing care as the disease progresses [5,6]. Managing expressed other important needs, namely the management of
disruptive behaviors can thus present real challenges for family their loved one’s mood and disruptive behaviors [22]. It would
caregivers. Although taking care of people with ADRD may thus be relevant to explore whether there are simple, credible,
often have a positive effect on caregivers (eg, sense of personal and accessible mobile apps that meet these needs [23]. Mobile
accomplishment and growth) [7], they remain at greater risk of apps have the potential to reach many family caregivers, as the
suffering from negative psychological (eg, anxiety, depression), majority use smartphones more than computers [23]. Being
emotional, and physical (eg, intense fatigue, other health easy and quick to update, they allow family caregivers to access
problems) consequences, as well as from financial issues and the most recent data [19]. Mobile apps are reported to be a more
job loss [8]. Informal caregiving represents up to almost half effective tool than conventional methods, such as classroom
of the care provided to people with dementia [9]; therefore, training, to inform caregivers about ADRD [23]. They could
helping family caregivers to lower the frequency of disruptive therefore be relevant and handy tools to promote learning and
behaviors, promoting their self-efficacy to manage these knowledge among family caregivers of people with ADRD.
behaviors, and minimizing their stress when they occur is Supporting them in managing disruptive behaviors is essential
crucial. if they are to increase their sense of competence or self-efficacy,
which may in turn reduce their burden of care and improve their
Many technological tools are available to improve the quality psychological well-being.
of life of people with ADRD and to reduce the mental and
emotional burden felt by family caregivers by helping them Context of the Study and Objectives
with the care, treatment, and management of the disease [10]. In fall 2017, the researchers (VP and MDM) were approached
For example, GPS technologies, including tracking devices (eg, by a nonprofit organization (the Quebec chapter of the
wandering path tracking and fall detection) [11] and intelligent international Planetree network) with expertise in implementing
interface devices (eg, Stay in Touch) [12] can help to locate the best practices based on a person-centered approach. This
person with ADRD and to communicate with the family organization wanted to adapt a Dutch mobile app to the Quebec
caregiver in case of emergency. Additionally, platforms offering context in order to reduce caregivers’ burden by helping them
informal support to family caregivers through sensors located manage disruptive behaviors of people with ADRD. However,
in the home that can monitor the behaviors of the person with a review of similar available mobile apps was deemed to be
ADRD (eg, iCarer [13], passive remote patient monitoring [14], considered necessary prior to adapting the Dutch mobile app.
QuietCare [15]) may represent possible solutions for family The aim of this study was to provide family caregivers with a
caregivers to improve the care provided [13]. Finally, online mobile app that could help them manage disruptive behaviors
communities have been created for family caregivers, which and thus reduce their burden of care. The following specific
may reduce isolation [16] and support the sharing of experiential objectives were jointly defined by the local director of public
knowledge and skills [16,17]. health (MG), the director general of the Quebec chapter of the
These technologies are often reported to be complicated to use international Planetree network, and VP and MDM: identify
by caregivers or to require intensive and sustained training [18]; existing mobile apps designed to support family caregivers of
nonetheless, the increasing use of smartphones has generated people with ADRD in managing disruptive behaviors; explore
considerable growth in the development of mobile apps in the the family caregivers’ view of these mobile apps regarding their
health sector, including for people with ADRD. These apps relevance to meet their needs and their usefulness in managing
mainly aim at improving the cognitive functions of the person disruptive behaviors; and document the types (eg, format,
with ADRD while maintaining social interactions [19]. Some ergonomics, clarity) of mobile apps that are of interest and
of these apps can help reduce the anxiety of family caregivers appeal to the most family caregivers.
by monitoring the person in and around the home in real time,
XSL• FO
RenderX
were continued until 10 consecutive applications no longer met

Methods the criteria (eg, memory game app for entertainment and not in
Design conjunction with some cognitive stimulation to prevent the onset
of ADRD) in order to ensure that as many relevant apps as
An increasing number of studies have been published in recent possible were identified. DL, CMM, VP, and MDM then
years aimed at identifying and analyzing mobile apps available screened the relevance of the first identified apps to determine
on the market in various health disciplines [23-26]. To use a if they met all the inclusion criteria and did not meet any of the
structured and systematic framework consistent with our exclusion criteria based on their description. Apps common to
objectives, a scoping review [27] was conducted. Although both stores were identified and counted only once. When the
scoping reviews traditionally involve research studies, the search was updated (March 10-15, 2019), the apps that no longer
method seemed appropriate for identifying apps available on satisfied the eligibility criteria were removed.
the market and for targeting those which may support family
caregivers of people with ADRD in managing disruptive Data Extraction and Organization
behaviors. Scoping reviews may indeed provide an overview The mobile apps selected in the previous step were then
of the available documentation to examine the extent of the downloaded and organized in a Microsoft Excel data chart
current knowledge on a particular subject [27]. The selected developed by the research team according to the following
approach was based on the following 6 steps described by information: app name and download size description of the
Arksey and O’Malley [27] and revised by Levac et al [28]: interface, internet connection required to access content (once
(1) formulation of research questions, (2) identification of the app has been downloaded); and content of the app
relevant sources, (3) selection of relevant mobile apps, (4) data (categories of information and how information is presented).
extraction and organization, (5) data analysis and results The data were organized following two parallel processes, one
synthesis, and (6) consultation. for mobile apps identified in Google Play (coordinated by DL)
Formulation of Research Questions and the other for App Store (coordinated by CMM). Apps that
no longer satisfied the inclusion criteria following this in-depth
This scoping review aimed to answer the following research analysis were excluded. In case of uncertainty, VP was consulted
questions: (objective 1) What mobile apps are available to to validate the decision. The suggested Dutch app
support family caregivers of people with ADRD in managing (Dementiegame) by Planetree network was subsequently
disruptive behaviors and what are their characteristics? included in the process.
(objectives 2 and 3) Do these mobile apps meet the needs of
family caregivers (ie, perceived relevance and usefulness) and Data Analysis and Results Synthesis
arouse their interest in using them? Data analysis was based on a qualitative and iterative process.
Identification of Relevant Sources The information collected was extracted to a grid based on the
following predetermined themes: quality (credibility and
The search strategy was established by 5 occupational therapy accuracy of the information), accessibility and
students (PG, DL, CMM, MPP, MR, and MV) and validated comprehensibility, and usability (speed and complexity). They
by 2 researchers (VP and MDM). The search was conducted were inspired by the themes central to the concepts of
from February 21 to February 28, 2018, on the most popular translational validity, which includes both face validity and
commercial app stores, Google Play Canada (Google) and App content validity [29] and evolved throughout the process.
Store Canada (Apple Inc), using the following keywords:
“Démence,” “démence proche aidant,” and “Alzheimer proche All the selected apps were analyzed independently by 3 raters
aidant” in French; and “Dementia,” “dementia caregiver,” (2 students and a researcher), for each of the app stores, Google
“Alzheimer,” and “Alzheimer caregiver” in English. Two Play (DL, MV, and MDM), and App Store (CMM, PG, and
models of smartphones were used, a Samsung Galaxy A5 and MDM). The apps were assessed by each rater according to their
an iPhone SE (Apple Inc), with Android (Google) and iOS relevance, and disparities were resolved by consensus.
(Apple Inc) operating systems respectively. Consultation With Knowledge Users
Selection of Relevant Mobile Apps A focus group meeting was conducted with family caregivers
App inclusion criteria for apps included the following: French of people with ADRD (knowledge users) to explore their
or English language; the targeting of disruptive behaviors perceptions of the selected apps according to their needs and
associated with ADRD; a main function of informing, educating, interest in using them. This method is more suitable for
or equipping family caregivers of people with ADRD; and free exploring the positive and negative components in usability and
use. Meanwhile, the exclusion criteria for apps were those with usefulness of new technology, crossing perspectives, and gaining
an exclusive focus on psychological support for family more detailed feedback (generated by sharing information
caregivers or the screening for early signs and symptoms of between the different participants) than are one-on-one single
ADRD, and those that required payment. interviews [30].
Two occupational therapy students (DL and CMM) first Recruitment and Selection of Participants
identified the mobile apps based on the titles. A minimum of Participants were recruited using a purposive nonprobability
50 applications per store was first selected to ensure a good sampling technique (29). We presented the study (objectives
diversity in the results. After reaching this threshold, searches and main stages of achievement) to caregivers (N=30) who

XSL• FO
RenderX
attended meetings held by 2 community support organizations. out independently and then corroborated by all members; if a
A brief description of the study and the contact details of the discrepancy arose, the issue was discussed to reach a consensus.
person to reach were given to family caregivers interested in
The local director of public health (MG) and the director general
participating in the research project. To be included in the study,
of the Quebec chapter of the Planetree network were consulted
participants had to be a family caregiver (eg, husband, wife,
during the process to ensure the relevance of the results and the
daughter, son) of a person with disruptive behaviors associated
selection of the most efficient knowledge transfer strategies.
with ADRD, speak French and have a good understanding of
Meetings with members of the research team were held on a
written French and English, and have concerns about disruptive
quarterly basis (2018) and then annually (2019, 2020).
behaviors exhibited by a family member with ADRD.
Ethical Considerations
Data Collection (Focus Group)
The study was approved by the ethics committee of Centre
Data were collected during a face-to-face focus group meeting
intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l’Estrie,
at the Research Center of Aging. The meeting began with a
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke. Participants
presentation of the selected apps to the participants, who had
completed a consent form before participating in the focus
received them a week prior to the focus group in order to allow
group.
for some familiarization. This presentation was made by MPP
and PG to help caregivers understand the aim of the apps. The
focus group, led by a researcher trained in the qualitative
Results
approach (MDM), allowed the participants to comment on the Selection of the Relevant Mobile Apps
perceived relevance of the apps’ content (useful information,
meets users’ needs) and their interest in future use. Participants Figure 1 shows the flowchart of the app selection process. The
were also encouraged to comment on issues or questions that searches in Google Play and App Store identified 118 apps (22
had not been addressed. Evidence from previous studies [31,32] available on both platforms, 50 available only in Google Play,
inspired the development of the focus group guide (Multimedia and 46 available only in App Store) based on title screening.
Appendix 1). The meeting lasted 94 minutes. The discussion Their descriptions were then screened based on the inclusion
was digitally audio-recorded and then fully transcribed by CMM and exclusion criteria. Apps were mainly excluded due to their
and MR. Participants were also asked to complete a aim not being in line with the research objectives, and several
sociodemographic questionnaire documenting their age and involved only disease screening, games, therapy, or even
gender, their relationship with and level of involvement in the fundraising. Others were designed to help the person with
care of the person with ADRD, and the type of mobile phone ADRD to function and were based on functionalities that were
they used. not relevant to the present study (geolocation, management of
schedules, alarm, etc). Finally, several apps did not target
Data Analysis (Focus Group) disruptive behaviors or did not provide tools to support the care
Transcription of the focus group meeting was content analyzed provided by family caregivers (detailed descriptions of dementia
[33]. MV, DL, and MDM manually and independently coded types, causes, and symptoms). The population targeted by the
the data using a grid with the predetermined themes of relevance apps was another reason for exclusion. An app could target
to participants’ needs and perceived usefulness. Participants’ several populations. Ultimately, 18 of the initially identified
comments were first associated with these themes and then 118 apps (15.3%) remained after applying the inclusion and
inductively subdivided into categories and subcategories as the exclusion criteria.
analysis progressed. The coding and categorization were carried

XSL• FO
RenderX
Figure 1. Flowchart of the app selection process.
Following the update in March 2019, half of these 18 apps (n=9) of the 8 apps that were presented to the family caregivers during
were excluded because they were no longer free or no longer the focus group meeting.
available. In addition, 1 app no longer targeted disruptive
behaviors, and another only referred users to a website. In the
Consultation With Knowledge Users: Description of
end, 7 apps were eligible for the focus group. By adding the Participants
app suggested by the director general of the Quebec chapter of Four family caregivers of people with ADRD showed interest
the Planetree network, 8 apps were ultimately included in the in the study and took part in the focus group meeting. Table 1
analysis: 1 was only available on Google Play, 1 on App Store, presents the characteristics of the sample. Participants were all
and 6 were available on both platforms. French-speaking White women aged from 58 to 78 years. Two
daughters and two spouses acted as the main family caregivers
Description of the Relevant Mobile Apps with an active and daily involvement with the person with
Of the 8 apps selected, 7 were in English, and only 2 of these, ADRD. Participants were at different levels of caregiving, with
Dementia Advisor (English and French) and Dementia Support relatives at the beginning, the middle, and the advanced stage
(English, German, Dutch, and Portuguese) were available in of the disease. Only 1 participant had a deceased relative;
more than one language. The Dutch app, Dementiegame, was however, she had an extensive caregiving experience with her
only available in Dutch and was the only app in the form of an husband and remained active in her caregiver role by supporting
interactive game. Multimedia Appendix 2 provides a description other loved ones. The participants were evenly distributed
XSL• FO
RenderX
between the 2 types of devices (Android or Apple) and their familiarity with the device was varied (quite to very familiar).
Table 1. Characteristics of focus group participants (n=4).

Participant Age Relationship with the Intensity/frequency of interactions ADRD stage Mobile device/familiarity with it
(years) person with ADRDa with the person with ADRD
1 58 Daughter Active, daily Advanced Android/familiar

2 67 Daughter Active, daily Deceased iPhone/very familiar
3 70 Spouse Active, daily Beginning Android/quite familiar
4 78 Spouse Active, daily Middle iPad/quite familiar
a
ADRD: Alzheimer disease and related dementias.
brings me back to another text]. Why not get a book

Consultation With Knowledge Users: Relevance and and leave it at that?
Perceived Usefulness of the Mobile Apps
Participants recommended using certain apps (DTA Behaviours,
Participants were asked if the selected mobile apps met their Dementia Support, and Dementia Advisor) before disruptive
needs and aroused their interest. Their feedback was divided behaviors occurred. One participant expressed this idea in
into 2 themes: (1) relevance of the mobile apps and (2) perceived reference to the Dementia Advisor app: “The first thing I would
usefulness of the mobile apps. A total of 13 categories and 13 do is look at all the daily situations presented, with a cool head.”
subcategories were identified in relation to these 2 themes. In addition, the apps may be used afterwards (for example,
Multimedia Appendix 3 (relevance) and Multimedia Appendix Dementia Advisor and DTA Behaviours) to get feedback on
4 (perceived usefulness) summarize the results. their interventions. As one participant said, “After the situation
Relevance of Mobile Apps gets better also, but here I would go to see what I did, what I
could have done better.” Other apps seemed interesting in terms
Participants spontaneously rated the relevance of the mobile
of using them on the spot when needed: “If my mom has a
apps regarding the fit (or not) between content and perceived
terrible attack, [I can open] my app […], then I’ll see what I
needs. Participants identified 3 mobile apps (DTA Behaviours,
can do […], ok well. […] It’s like here and now.” Also, not
Dementia Advisor, and Dementia Emergency) that they thought
surprisingly, participants said they were more attracted to
contained the information that family caregivers may need to
easier-to-understand apps, especially those available in their
manage disruptive behaviors at a given point in the course of
mother tongue (ie, in French vs only in English). Family
the disease. Referring to the DTA Behaviours app, one
caregivers reported being inclined to use mobile apps when the
participant said, “Well, all the subjects that are named, I mean
information was clear, even if not in French (ie, DTA
in any case, I went through ALL of them with my mother, ALL
Behaviours, Dementia Advisor, and Dementia Emergency). The
[…] at different stages”. Participants also noted that certain apps
format of the mobile apps and, more precisely, the way in which
(Dementia Games and Dementia Emergency) did not seem
the information was presented and organized, also influenced
relevant to supporting a caregiver in managing disruptive
their opinion:
behaviors, as their content was more about actual changes in
behaviors with ADRD than advice on how to deal with them. But […] the first one I had earlier, on [Android,
They also thought that some apps might be more helpful to other Dementia Emergency], well I understood it very
family members less involved in care than the main caregiver; quickly […] I was not lost at all [because the
for example, one participant said, “But on the other hand, the information is well organized and easy to find]
last one you presented to us [Dementiegame], I see [it] [as being Conversely, participants were less likely to use mobile apps
for] children or brothers and sisters.” Indeed, these apps relate that required more steps to find needed information; for instance,
more to the impact of the disease on daily living, a reality that one participant did not like Care4Dementia because there was
other family members are less aware of as compared to the main “too much research.”
caregiver.
Overall Rating
Perceived Usefulness of Mobile Apps
Participants concluded that the ideal mobile app would include
First, participants were asked about the likelihood of their using concrete intervention strategies to apply when disruptive
the mobile app and about the context in which they might be behaviors occur. In this regard and based on the apps themselves
more likely to use them. Not surprisingly, compatibility of the (regardless of the platform/mobile device), participants reported
apps with their mobile device was the main factor influencing that they could potentially use 2 of the apps, Dementia Advisor
use. Furthermore, participants expressed little interest in certain and DTA Behaviours. As one said, “These are tools that I need,
apps (Care4Dementia and Alzheimer’s Daily Companion) really concrete: there is a behavior [which arises and the
because they did not see any added value: application tells you] and what you can do [to cope with it]”.
It’s […] like a book. No need for a mobile application Figure 2 and Figure 3 show sample screenshots of Dementia
[to present such content], it’s like […] I press here Advisor and DTA Behaviours, respectively.
and it brings me [to a text], and [if I press there, it
XSL• FO
RenderX
Figure 2. Screenshots from the Dementia Advisor app.

XSL• FO
RenderX
Figure 3. Screenshots from the DTA Behaviours app.
selected to be reviewed by caregivers, and only 2 of these were

Discussion perceived as relevant and useful by caregivers.
Main Findings Our review suggested that there are currently a limited number
This study aimed to identify currently available mobile apps in of mobile apps on the market targeting family caregivers to help
Canada developed to support family caregivers in managing them deal with disruptive behaviors of people with ADRD.
disruptive behaviors of people with ADRD, explore the Because health apps only started expanding in 2013 [34],
relevance and usefulness of these apps as perceived by customized apps to assist caregivers in dealing with disruptive
caregivers, and document the types of apps that appeal to the behaviors of people with ADRD are still scarce. Moreover, for
most family caregivers. Of the 118 apps inventoried, 8 were the apps reviewed, it was challenging to determine if the

XSL• FO
RenderX
information provided was evidence-based and to what extent it The study also has some limitations. First, as apps were searched
met family caregivers’ needs. for on the App Store Canada and Google Play Canada databases,
the results only reflect the app market in this country. It was
According to our results, few mobile apps sufficiently met the
also not possible to cover all existing apps. Thus, an arbitrary
caregivers’ needs in managing disruptive behaviors. More
limit was placed on our search. As a result, some apps could
specifically, only Dementia Advisor and DTA Behaviors
have been omitted, even though the cutoff used suggests that
appealed to most of the participants by offering concrete
few relevant apps would have met the inclusion criteria. Third,
strategies to manage disruptive behaviors of people with ADRD.
some apps used external websites. As the information provided
Participants mentioned that these apps also have a
outside of the apps was not reviewed as thoroughly as was the
well-organized design interface, providing customized and clear
in-app content, we do not know the quality of the content
information for quick searches. As most users, including
provided to family caregivers through these external links.
caregivers, now use smartphones [34], it is important to prevent
Further studies should ensure that the applications developed
apps from being difficult to use [35]. Past studies reported that
to support caregivers of people with ADRD are based on
the small size of smartphone screens and texts in the apps were
evidence-based data (eg, theories of managing behavioral
common usability issues, especially for older caregivers [36,37].
symptoms). Furthermore, the number of family caregivers in
Hence, app usability is a key factor that needs to be addressed
our focus groups was small, and no male caregivers could
to improve caregivers’ experience [38]. Overall, our findings
participate in the study within the timeframe of recruitment.
are in line with previous results as they highlighted the
Despite the group being all women, the 4 participants were
importance of adapting health apps to the needs of users,
varied in terms of age (58 to 78 years), relationship with the
including caregivers [34].
person with ADRD (2 spouses and 2 daughters), and literacy
Regarding the Dementiegame app, most participants said that level. It is not surprising to have recruited only women, as
it did not meet their current needs, due to difficulty navigating around two-thirds of caregivers of people with dementia are
through the app and accessing information. Our results underline women [40]. Moreover, the majority of persons who attended
the importance for future studies to involve family caregivers the meetings held by key community support organizations
in designing useful, relevant, and easy-to-use apps, especially (where we recruited) were women. It is also well known that
by providing concrete strategies to help them deal with elderly women are more likely to participate in research studies
disruptive behaviors on a daily basis. In this regard, the ‘living than their male counterparts. Several studies carried out with
lab” approach might be adopted since it aims to develop caregivers of patients with dementia have mainly women as
innovative, sustainable solutions to the growing challenge of participants [41,42]. Although few in number, the participants
managing disruptive behaviors of people with ADRD [39]. had different levels of familiarity with the technology (from
quite to very familiar) and had a rich experience of caregiving.
Finally, our review of mobile apps was updated in May 2020,
Finally, the themes emerging during the focus group discussion
using the same 2 platforms (App Store and Google Play). One
triggered an emotional reaction in some participants, who were
new relevant app called CogniCare was found. This app was
not comfortable discussing the app. Therefore, providing time
updated recently in April 2020. It provides a rich source of
at the outset to address emotional issues might have allowed
useful tips and short videos to help family caregivers manage
participants to vent their emotions and then focus on the study’s
disruptive behaviors of their loved ones with ADRD. As our
objectives. Recruiting former caregivers may provide access to
study and content analysis of the focus group discussion was
rich experience while reducing the likelihood of being
completed before we found this new app, our results only apply
emotionally overloaded during the study.
to the apps previously reviewed in this paper.
Recommendations and Future Directions
Strengths and Limitations
The focus group discussion helped to identify what family
This study has several strengths. First, for the scoping review,
caregivers find relevant and useful in a mobile app, even if
we followed a rigorous, reliable approach based on Levac [28].
future studies should involve more participants. Inclusion of
Many scoping reviews do not include the last step (consultation),
concrete intervention strategies appears to be an important
but we performed it using a rigorous method to validate the
feature. These findings may guide the development of future
results with family caregivers. The diverse profiles of the family
apps for these caregivers. In addition, using mobile apps is an
caregivers who participated in the focus group discussion was
effective way to improve knowledge because they are ready at
a strength of this study (children and spouses of various ages).
hand and can be consulted quickly. Apps are therefore likely to
Second, the analysis of the selected mobile apps, exploration
reduce difficulties, such as being afraid of leaving the family
of the app once downloaded, and data validation by 4 team
member alone at home, encountered by many current training
members (2 per type of mobile app store) contributed to the
courses. On the other hand, technological difficulties can impede
study’s reliability and reduced subjectivity bias. Finally, the
their use, which underlines the importance of involving family
study included only free apps. Although this decision may limit
caregivers with different degrees of digital literacy when
the number of apps, this methodological choice was deemed
designing apps [43]. In addition, as the medical terminology
essential by the local director of public health to increase access
used in apps should be easy for target users to understand [44],
to the general public, especially to caregivers with financial
future studies should determine to what extent the apps are
issues.
comprehensible to caregivers with differing degrees of health
literacy, a factor which was not fully examined in our study.

XSL• FO
RenderX
One important public health priority is to promote access to 2 people may not find the same list of apps in Google Play due
knowledge tools for every individual, especially the most to the algorithms used to partially personalize the results [47].
vulnerable. In this regard, some of the apps reviewed require In addition, we must remain critical about the list generated, as
an internet connection, which may reduce caregivers’ access to sponsored apps top the list despite not necessarily being the
them, as not everyone can afford internet services. Moreover, most relevant.
most of the apps reviewed did not have password protection or
require login. One common concern of mobile health apps is
Conclusions
privacy, as users often enter their loved ones’ health information Considering the proliferation of mobile apps and their increased
[45,46]. Future attention should be paid to ways to protect users’ use by family caregivers, available mobile apps designed to
private information, without this being a barrier to using the help manage disruptive behaviors should meet their needs in
app. terms of both content and usability. However, when this study
was conducted, few apps met these criteria. Therefore, this study
Finally, with the constantly evolving market, a certain aims to reduce this deficiency by highlighting what caregivers
“volatility” of the available apps has been noted. In fact, some consider relevant and useful in existing mobile apps, while
of the apps identified might have been discontinued, while new identifying those tailored to family caregivers’ needs. These
ones may have appeared. There are also variations between the findings may help caregivers to manage disruptive behaviors
2 stores regarding available apps. It is therefore suggested that more effectively and satisfactorily, reduce their burden of care
an app search be carefully planned to ensure exhaustivity and and, ultimately, delay the institutionalization of people with
reproducibility with respect to the review of the apps. Indeed, ADRD.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the president of the Planetree Quebec network, Lucie Dumas, for her support throughout the process.
This study could not have taken place without the financial support of Fondation Vitae and the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The authors warmly thank the focus group participants, Sandra Asselin (Alzheimer Society of Estrie) and Sonia Leclerc (Support
for Family Caregivers in Estrie) for their participation, as well as Monia D’Amours for her valuable work to support the revision
and submission of the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
None declared.
Multimedia Appendix 1
Guide for focus group discussion.
[DOCX File , 14 KB-Multimedia Appendix 1]
Description of the eight selected apps presented to participants.
[PDF File (Adobe PDF File), 117 KB-Multimedia Appendix 2]
Emerging results for the relevance theme.
[PNG File , 208 KB-Multimedia Appendix 3]
Emerging results for the perceived usefulness theme.
[PNG File , 277 KB-Multimedia Appendix 4]
References
1. Norton S, Matthews FE, Brayne C. A commentary on studies presenting projections of the future prevalence of dementia.
BMC Public Health 2013 Jan 02;13:1 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1] [Medline: 23280303]
2. Manuel DG, Garner R, Finès P, Bancej C, Flanagan W, Tu K, et al. Alzheimer's and other dementias in Canada, 2011 to
2031: a microsimulation Population Health Modeling (POHEM) study of projected prevalence, health burden, health
services, and caregiving use. Popul Health Metr 2016;14:37 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1186/s12963-016-0107-z] [Medline:
27822143]
3. Martinková J, Kabátová O, Puteková S. Influence of gender on the prevalence of behavioral symptoms in patients with
Alzheimer's dementia. Kontakt 2019 Mar 27;21(1):74-79. [doi: 10.32725/kont.2019.013]

XSL• FO
RenderX
4. Brown C, Stoffel V, Munoz J. Occupational therapy in mental health: A vision for participation. In: Schaber P, editor.
Occupational Therapy in Mental Health. Philadelphia: FA Davis Co; 2011:225-237.
5. Alzheimer’s Association. 2015 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures. Alzheimers Dement 2015 Mar;11(3):332-384. [doi:
10.1016/j.jalz.2015.02.003] [Medline: 25984581]
6. Alzheimer's Association. 2019 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures. Alzheimer's & Dementia 2019 Mar;15(3):321-387.
[doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.01.010]
7. Yu DSF, Cheng S, Wang J. Unravelling positive aspects of caregiving in dementia: an integrative review of research
literature. Int J Nurs Stud 2018 Mar;79:1-26. [doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.10.008] [Medline: 29128685]
8. Wolff JL, Spillman BC, Freedman VA, Kasper JD. A national profile of family and unpaid caregivers who assist older
adults with health care activities. JAMA Intern Med 2016 Mar;176(3):372-379 [FREE Full text] [doi:
10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.7664] [Medline: 26882031]
9. Hurd MD, Martorell P, Delavande A, Mullen KJ, Langa KM. Monetary costs of dementia in the United States. N Engl J
Med 2013 Apr 4;368(14):1326-1334 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1204629] [Medline: 23550670]
10. Martínez-Alcalá CI, Pliego-Pastrana P, Rosales-Lagarde A, Lopez-Noguerola JS, Molina-Trinidad EM. Information and
communication technologies in the care of the elderly: systematic review of applications aimed at patients with dementia
and caregivers. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 2016 May 02;3(1):e6 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/rehab.5226] [Medline:
28582258]
11. Ko C, Leu F, Lin I. A wandering path tracking and fall detection system for people with dementia. 2014 Presented at: Ninth
International Conference on Broadband and Wireless Computing, Communication and Applications; 2014 Nov 8-10;
Guangdong, China p. 306-311. [doi: 10.1109/bwcca.2014.127]
12. Brankaert R, Snaphaan L, den Ouden E. Stay in touch: an in a context evaluation of a smartphone interface designed for
people with dementia. In: Ambient Assisted Living and Daily Activities. 2014 Presented at: 6th International
Work-Conference, IWAAL; 2014 Dec 2-5; Belfast, UK p. 2. [doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-13105-4_42]
13. Lotfi A, Langensiepen C, Moreno P, Gómez E, Chernbumroong S. An ambient assisted living technology platform for
informal carers of the elderly. In: Giokas K, Bokor L, Hopfgartner F, editors. eHealth 360°. Lecture Notes of the Institute
for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, 81. Springer, Cham. Germany: Springer;
Jun 14, 2016:978-973.
14. Finch M, Griffin K, Pacala JT. Reduced healthcare use and apparent savings with passive home monitoring technology: a
pilot study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2017 Jun;65(6):1301-1305. [doi: 10.1111/jgs.14892] [Medline: 28407212]
15. Lexis M, Everink I, van der Heide L, Spreeuwenberg M, Willems C, de Witte L. Activity monitoring technology to support
homecare delivery to frail and psychogeriatric elderly persons living at home alone. TAD 2013 Aug 06;25(3):189-197.
[doi: 10.3233/tad-130377]
16. Pagán-Ortiz ME, Cortés DE, Rudloff N, Weitzman P, Levkoff S. Use of an online community to provide support to caregivers
of people with dementia. J Gerontol Soc Work 2014;57(6-7):694-709 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1080/01634372.2014.901998]
[Medline: 24689359]
17. Egan KJ, Pinto-Bruno, Bighelli I, Berg-Weger M, van SA, Albanese E, et al. Online training and support programs designed
to improve mental health and reduce burden among caregivers of people with dementia: a systematic review. J Am Med
Dir Assoc 2018 Mar;19(3):200-206.e1. [doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2017.10.023] [Medline: 29306605]
18. Holthe T, Jentoft R, Arntzen C, Thorsen K. Benefits and burdens: family caregivers' experiences of assistive technology
(AT) in everyday life with persons with young-onset dementia (YOD). Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2018
Nov;13(8):754-762. [doi: 10.1080/17483107.2017.1373151] [Medline: 28891356]
19. Brown EL, Ruggiano N, Li J, Clarke PJ, Kay ES, Hristidis V. Smartphone-based health technologies for dementia care:
opportunities, challenges, and current practices. J Appl Gerontol 2019 Jan;38(1):73-91. [doi: 10.1177/0733464817723088]
[Medline: 28774215]
20. Moreira H, Oliveira R, Flores N. STAlz: remotely supporting the diagnosis, tracking and rehabilitation of patients with
Alzheimer's. : IEEE; 2013 Presented at: IEEE 15th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and
Services (Healthcom); 2013 Oct 9-12; Lisbon, Portugal p. 584-581. [doi: 10.1109/healthcom.2013.6720743]
21. Yousaf K, Mehmood Z, Awan IA, Saba T, Alharbey R, Qadah T, et al. A comprehensive study of mobile-health based
assistive technology for the healthcare of dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Health Care Manag Sci 2019 Jun
20:287-309. [doi: 10.1007/s10729-019-09486-0] [Medline: 31218511]
22. McCabe M, You E, Tatangelo G. Hearing their voice: a systematic review of dementia family caregivers' needs. Gerontologist
2016 Dec;56(5):e70-e88. [doi: 10.1093/geront/gnw078] [Medline: 27102056]
23. Lee J, Nguyen H, Park J, Tran L, Nguyen T, Huynh Y. Usages of computers and smartphones to develop dementia care
education program for Asian American family caregivers. Healthc Inform Res 2017 Oct;23(4):338-342 [FREE Full text]
[doi: 10.4258/hir.2017.23.4.338] [Medline: 29181245]
24. Anthony Berauk VL, Murugiah MK, Soh YC, Chuan Sheng Y, Wong TW, Ming LC. Mobile health applications for caring
of older people: review and comparison. Ther Innov Regul Sci 2018 May;52(3):374-382. [doi: 10.1177/2168479017725556]
[Medline: 29714532]

XSL• FO
RenderX
25. Arnhold M, Quade M, Kirch W. Mobile applications for diabetics: a systematic review and expert-based usability evaluation
considering the special requirements of diabetes patients age 50 years or older. J Med Internet Res 2014;16(4):e104 [FREE
Full text] [doi: 10.2196/jmir.2968] [Medline: 24718852]
26. Matava C, Leo A, Alam F. Mobile apps for teaching intubation: scoping review and critical analysis in elearning. JMIR
Med Educ 2017 Sep 05;3(2):e15 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.2196/mededu.7919] [Medline: 28874335]
27. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research
Methodology 2005 Feb;8(1):19-32. [doi: 10.1080/1364557032000119616]
28. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 2010;5:69 [FREE Full
text] [doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-69] [Medline: 20854677]
29. Trochim W. Research Methods Knowledge Base. Measurement validity types. URL: https://www.socialresearchmethods.net/
kb/measval.php [accessed 2020-12-11]
30. Beckert B, Grebing S, Böhl F. How to put usability into focus: using focus groups to evaluate the usability of interactive
theorem provers. Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci 2014 Oct 29;167:4-13. [doi: 10.4204/EPTCS.167.3]
31. Schnall R, Rojas M, Bakken S, Brown W, Carballo-Dieguez A, Carry M, et al. A user-centered model for designing
consumer mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps). J Biomed Inform 2016 Apr;60:243-251. [doi:
10.1016/j.jbi.2016.02.002] [Medline: 26903153]
32. Vaportzis E, Clausen MG, Gow AJ. Older adults perceptions of technology and barriers to interacting with tablet computers:
a focus group study. Front Psychol 2017 Oct 04;8:1687 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01687] [Medline:
29071004]
33. Mucchielli R. L'analyse de contenu : des documents et des communications [Content Analysis: Documents and
Communications] 9th Ed. Paris: ESF; Feb 01, 2006.
34. Zapata BC, Fernández-Alemán JL, Idri A, Toval A. Empirical studies on usability of mHealth apps: a systematic literature
review. J Med Syst 2015 Feb;39(2):1. [doi: 10.1007/s10916-014-0182-2] [Medline: 25600193]
35. Coursaris C, Kim D. A meta-analytical review of empirical mobile usability studies. J. Usability Stud 2011;6(3):117-171.
36. Plaza I, Martín L, Martin S, Medrano C. Mobile applications in an aging society: Status and trends. Journal of Systems and
Software 2011 Nov;84(11):1977-1988. [doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2011.05.035]
37. Kurniawan S. Mobile phone design for older persons. Interactions 2007 Jul 01;14(4):24. [doi: 10.1145/1273961.1273979]
38. Cruz ZB, Hernández NA, Idri A, Fernández-Alemán JL, Toval A. Mobile PHRs compliance with Android and iOS usability
guidelines. J Med Syst 2014 Aug;38(8):81. [doi: 10.1007/s10916-014-0081-6] [Medline: 24957397]
39. Kareborn BB, Stahlbrost A. Living Lab: an open and citizen-centric approach for innovation. IJIRD 2009;1(4):356. [doi:
10.1504/ijird.2009.022727]
40. Alzheimer's AAFC. Families care: Alzheimer's Caregiving in the United States. Chicago, IL: Alzheimer's Association and
National Alliance for Caregiving; 2004:A.
41. Chiatti C, Rimland JM, Bonfranceschi F, Masera F, Bustacchini S, Cassetta L, Fabrizia Lattanzio, UP-TECH research
group. The UP-TECH project, an intervention to support caregivers of Alzheimer's disease patients in Italy: preliminary
findings on recruitment and caregiving burden in the baseline population. Aging Ment Health 2015;19(6):517-525. [doi:
10.1080/13607863.2014.954526] [Medline: 25188811]
42. Ducharme F, Lachance L, Kergoat M, Coulombe R, Antoine P, Pasquier F. A comparative descriptive study of characteristics
of early- and late-onset dementia family caregivers. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2016 Mar;31(1):48-56 [FREE Full
text] [doi: 10.1177/1533317515578255] [Medline: 25814627]
43. Laboratoire d'innovations par et pour les aînés (LIPPA). Qu’est-ce qu’un laboratoire vivant? URL: http://lippa.
recherche.usherbrooke.ca/quest-ce-quun-laboratoire-vivant/
44. Boulos MNK, Brewer AC, Karimkhani C, Buller DB, Dellavalle RP. Mobile medical and health apps: state of the art,
concerns, regulatory control and certification. Online J Public Health Inform 2014;5(3):229 [FREE Full text] [doi:
10.5210/ojphi.v5i3.4814] [Medline: 24683442]
45. Eng DS, Lee JM. The promise and peril of mobile health applications for diabetes and endocrinology. Pediatr Diabetes
2013 Jun;14(4):231-238 [FREE Full text] [doi: 10.1111/pedi.12034] [Medline: 23627878]
46. Choi SK, Yelton B, Ezeanya VK, Kannaley K, Friedman DB. Review of the content and quality of mobile applications
about alzheimer's disease and related dementias. J Appl Gerontol 2020 Jun;39(6):601-608 [FREE Full text] [doi:
10.1177/0733464818790187] [Medline: 30049239]
47. Nicas J, Collins K. How Apple's apps topped rivals in the app store it controls. New York Times. URL: https://www.
nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/09/technology/apple-app-store-competition.html [accessed 2019-01-09]
Abbreviations
ADRD: Alzheimer disease and related dementias

XSL• FO
RenderX
Edited by J Wang; submitted 02.07.20; peer-reviewed by K Meyer, B Inday; comments to author 27.09.20; revised version received
30.01.21; accepted 14.02.21; published 16.04.21
Please cite as:
Désormeaux-Moreau M, Michel CM, Vallières M, Racine M, Poulin-Paquet M, Lacasse D, Gionet P, Genereux M, Lachiheb W,
Provencher V
Mobile Apps to Support Family Caregivers of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias in Managing Disruptive
Behaviors: Qualitative Study With Users Embedded in a Scoping Review
JMIR Aging 2021;4(2):e21808
URL: https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808
doi: 10.2196/21808
PMID:
©Marjorie Désormeaux-Moreau, Charlie-Maude Michel, Mélanie Vallières, Maryse Racine, Myriame Poulin-Paquet, Delphine
Lacasse, Pascale Gionet, Melissa Genereux, Wael Lachiheb, Véronique Provencher. Originally published in JMIR Aging
(http://aging.jmir.org), 16.04.2021. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Aging, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information,
a link to the original publication on http://aging.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

XSL• FO
RenderX

PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JMIR AGING Désormeaux-Moreau et al

Mobile Apps to Support Family Caregivers of People With

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 1

(JMIR Aging 2021;4(2):e21808) doi: 10.2196/21808

estimating the probability of wandering using geolocation, as

were continued until 10 consecutive applications no longer met

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 3

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 4

Figure 1. Flowchart of the app selection process.

Table 1. Characteristics of focus group participants (n=4).

1 58 Daughter Active, daily Advanced Android/familiar

brings me back to another text]. Why not get a book

Figure 2. Screenshots from the Dementia Advisor app.

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 7

Figure 3. Screenshots from the DTA Behaviours app.

selected to be reviewed by caregivers, and only 2 of these were

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 8

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 9

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 10

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 11

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 12

https://aging.jmir.org/2021/2/e21808 JMIR Aging 2021 | vol. 4 | iss. 2 | e21808 | p. 13

You might also like