What makes online substance-use interventions engaging? A systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND: Online substance-use interventions are effective in producing reductions in harmful-use. However, low user engagement rates with online interventions reduces overall effectiveness of interventions. Identifying optimal strategies with which to engage users with online substance-use interventions may improve usage rates and subsequent effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify the most prevalent engagement promoting strategies utilised to increase use of online substance-use interventions. (2) To determine whether the identified engagement promoting strategies increased said use of online substance-use interventions. REVIEW METHODS: The reviewed followed Cochrane methodology. Databases were searched for online substance-use interventions and engagement promoting strategies limited by study type (randomised controlled trial). Due to heterogeneity between engagement promoting strategies and engagement outcomes, meta-analytic techniques were not possible. Narrative synthesis methods were used. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included. Five different engagement promoting strategies were identified: (1) tailoring; (2) delivery strategies; (3) incentives; (4) reminders; (5) social support. The most frequently reported engagement promoting strategies was tailoring (47% of studies), followed by reminders and social support (40% of studies) and delivery strategies (33% of studies). The narrative synthesis demonstrated that tailoring, multimedia delivery of content and reminders are potential techniques for promoting engagement. The evidence for social support was inconclusive and negative for incentives. CONCLUSIONS: This review was the first to examine engagement promoting strategies in solely online substance-use interventions. Three strategies were identified that may be integral in promoting engagement with online substance-use interventions. However, the small number of eligible extracted studies, inconsistent reporting of engagement outcomes and diversity of engagement features prevent firmer conclusions. More high-quality trials examining engagement are required.