Digital empathy in behaviour change interventions: A survey study on health coach responses to patient cues

• Published in: Digital health 2024-01, Vol.10, p.20552076231225889-20552076231225889
• Main Authors: Rey Velasco, E, Demjén, Z, Skinner, TC
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Empathy; Original; Patients
• ISSN: 2055-2076; 2055-2076
• DOI: 10.1177/20552076231225889

Introduction Digital health coaching interventions for behaviour change (BC) are effective in addressing various health conditions. Implementing these requires accurate descriptions of components and health coaches (HC) delivery methods, alongside understanding patients’ perceptions of these interactions. The HC–patient relationship significantly influences BC outcomes. Here, empathy is an important driver that enables HCs to offer tailored advice that resonates with patients’ needs, fostering motivation. Yet, defining and measuring empathy remains a challenge. In this study, we draw on various BC frameworks and Pounds’ empathy appraisal approach to categorise HCs responses to patient cues and explore the interplay between empathy and BC. Methods Using a two-round survey, we collected responses from 11 HCs to 10 patient messages from the Bump2Baby and Me trial in a simulated interaction. We analysed 88 messages to identify empathic responses and behaviour change techniques. Results Patients’ implicit empathy opportunities showed higher response rates than explicit ones. HCs prioritised positive reinforcement and employed various strategies to achieve similar objectives. The most common empathic response was ‘Acceptance’ for patients’ implicit positive expressions of self-judgement. HCs emphasised relatedness-support and competence-promoting techniques for implicit negative feelings and judgements, such as ‘Show unconditional regard’ and ‘Review behaviour goals’, and ‘Action planning and Problem-solving’ techniques to address explicit negative appreciations and feelings. Conclusion The use of different techniques with the same objective highlights the complexity of BC interactions. Further research is needed to explore the impact of this variability on patient outcomes and programme fidelity.