Evidence Hub

Facilitators and Barriers to Digital Health Technologies for Self-Management in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: Systematic Review Based on the Updated CFIR 2.0 Framework

Su F, Yao Y, Lin X, Su Q, Hu Y, Pei H, Xu Q

Journal of medical Internet research, 2026

3,002 participants

Abstract

Background: The integration of digital health technology (DHT) into chronic kidney disease (CKD) care holds transformative potential for enhancing patient self-management and slowing disease progression. Despite the growing availability of DHT, there remains limited understanding of the factors that facilitate or hinder their adoption and use among patients with CKD.

Objective: This study aims to identify the facilitators and barriers to the use of digital health interventions for self-management in patients with CKD, and to provide evidence to inform the development of implementation strategies.

Methods: A systematic search was performed across 11 databases (CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP Database, Chinese Medical Journals Database, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection) from database inception to May 12, 2026, with reports restricted to those published in English or Chinese. Eligible studies were required to enroll adult patients with CKD (aged ≥18 years); report facilitators, barriers, or influencing factors related to DHT use for self-management; and use qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods designs. Nonempirical articles, conference abstracts, and studies without accessible full text were excluded. Two researchers (Feiyue Su and Yao Yao) independently assessed the quality of the included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Extracted data were coded deductively to the Consolidated Framework for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,002 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free