Healthcare professionals' perspectives on digital biomarkers for monitoring inflammatory arthritis: insights from a qualitative study rooted in design thinking.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this paper was to explore rheumatology healthcare professionals' (HCPs) perspectives on the potential role, value, and implementation challenges of digital biomarkers (dBMs) for monitoring inflammatory arthritis (IA), specifically psoriatic and rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Following the Design Thinking methodology, 7 focus groups and 1 interview were conducted with a total of 34 rheumatology HCPs. The topic guide covered: (remote) monitoring psoriatic and rheumatoid arthritis; the clinical consultation; work satisfaction; and the role of digital technologies in rheumatology. Thematic analysis followed Braun and Clarke's methodology, supported by investigator triangulation and member checking to ensure credibility.

RESULTS

Content analysis revealed 5 overarching themes. Participants described current IA care as high quality but increasingly unsustainable, prompting HCPs to seek more efficient, digitally supported models of care delivery (theme 1). Limitations in best-practice digital care, including reduced assessment accuracy and weakened HCP-patient communication, were identified, leading to more conservative treatment decisions (theme 2). dBMs were regarded as complementary tools to enhance care efficiency and support data-driven, high-resolution remote monitoring (theme 3), although concerns were voiced about their accuracy, impact on therapeutic relationships, and HCP workload (theme 4). Adoption is influenced by trust in technology, professional values, and patient-specific factors (eg, disease complexity and preferences). Successful integration will require patient-centred seamless workflows and careful consideration of patient readiness (theme 5).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that although HCPs see potential in dBMs, their adoption is contingent on trust, clinical relevance, alignment with professional values, and implementation. Development efforts should prioritise robust evidence, clinician and patient engagement, and thoughtful integration into routine practice.