Digital Addiction Tool Approached Usability Benchmark Despite Customization and Text Hurdles

A digital platform evaluated as part of a collaborative care management intervention for substance use disorder treatment approached standard usability benchmarks but revealed key human factor barriers to sustained engagement, according to a brief research report. Investigators evaluated the tool among adults with lived experience of addiction and related treatment, finding that usability scores reached a mean of 67.6 with a standard deviation of 15.0, closely nearing the commonly used system usability benchmark of 68.

Substance use disorders remain highly prevalent while access to formal care continues to be limited. Although digital health interventions have been investigated as a viable mechanism to expand treatment reach, individuals routinely disengage from these platforms. The investigated digital platform was evaluated within the context of a collaborative care management model aimed at substance use disorder treatment in under-resourced areas to determine how human factors shape feasibility, usability, and accessibility.

The study cohort consisted of 18 adults who had personal lived experience with addiction and related treatment, including 12 female participants. Each participant engaged directly with the digital treatment platform over a one-week testing period. Following the trial engagement, participants completed semi-structured interviews exploring their experiences, alongside a battery of validated quantitative assessment instruments.

Researchers gathered quantitative data using four distinct assessment tools: the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, the Intervention Appropriateness Measure, the Feasibility of Intervention Measure, and the System Usability Scale. To evaluate the qualitative interview data, the authors applied a template-based rapid analysis approach to identify overarching human factor themes.

Quantitative evaluations across the implementation measures showed moderate ratings across all domains on five-point scales featuring a neutral midpoint of 3. Acceptability yielded a mean score of 3.4 with a 95 percent confidence interval ranging from 3.0 to 3.9, appropriateness registered a mean of 3.3 with a 95 percent confidence interval from 2.8 to 3.9, and feasibility demonstrated a mean of 3.4 with a 95 percent confidence interval of 2.8 to 4.0.

Qualitative analysis revealed that participants encountered specific usability obstacles during use, including heavy text volume, a lack of interface customization, and inconsistent system notifications. Participants reported that assigned therapeutic goals need to align directly with an individual user’s specific circumstances and locally available resources to properly support platform utilization. In addition, users expressed a desire for enhanced personalization, direct integration with existing recovery supports, and dedicated design features that encourage routine engagement.

The authors noted that digital interventions frequently suffer from high rates of disengagement in real-world settings. Addressing these challenges requires digital tools to align closely with end-user needs and their immediate surrounding environments by remaining both person- and context-specific. Careful attention to these human factors can improve usability and accessibility while preventing the creation of additional barriers for individuals seeking treatment in under-resourced areas.

Conducted by Nicholas L. Bormann and colleagues from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, the investigation evaluated a mobile health tool embedded within a collaborative care management model.

Following one week of active exposure to the digital treatment platform, participants completed structured assessments measuring acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and system usability.

Ultimately, the researchers concluded that overcoming the persistent problem of user disengagement requires digital tools to be both person- and context-specific.

Subject of Research: Human factors shaping engagement with a digital addiction treatment platform

Article Title: Human factors shaping engagement with a digital treatment platform among individuals with lived experience of addiction

Article References: Bormann, N. L., Smith, J. L., Paul, M. M., Lai, B., Stoppel, C., Tuen, K. A., Cox, D. M., Breitinger, S. A., Williams, M. D., & Oesterle, T. S. (2026). Human factors shaping engagement with a digital treatment platform among individuals with lived experience of addiction. Frontiers in Digital Health, 8, Article 2016837. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2026.2016837

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2026.2016837

Keywords: substance use disorder, digital health, usability, human factors, collaborative care, implementation science, mobile health, treatment accessibility, Human, factors, shaping, engagement