# Recommendations of digital health applications to patients by Portuguese General Practitioners: a cross-sectional study

## TL;DR

This study explores how often Portuguese GPs recommend digital health apps and identifies factors influencing their recommendations.

## Contribution

The study provides insights into the adoption of digital health apps by Portuguese GPs and identifies key facilitators and barriers.

## Key findings

- 45.2% of Portuguese GPs recommend digital health apps, mostly for physical activity, nutrition, and chronic disease management.
- GPs who recommend apps are more likely to use health apps themselves and believe apps reduce face-to-face consultations.
- Lack of scientific validity is a significant barrier for GPs not recommending apps.

## Abstract

The growing adoption of digital health applications (apps) presents new opportunities for General Practitioners (GPs) to enhance care and empower patients. However, little is known about how Portuguese GPs incorporate these apps into their practice.

To identify the distinguishing characteristics of Portuguese GPs recommending the use of digital health apps to patients, and to investigate the facilitators and barriers influencing this behaviour.

A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire distributed to Portuguese GPs between July 2023 and January 2024. Univariate logistic regressions identified predictors of app recommendation. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests compared facilitators and barriers between groups.

A total of 126 GPs responded (72.2% women; median age 36 years [IQR: 31.8–43.0]); 45.2% recommended digital health apps. The most common were for apps for physical activity (32.4%), nutrition (21.3%), and chronic disease management (21.3%). Among GPs recommending apps, 70.2% did 1–4 times monthly. Most GPs believed that apps could improve chronic disease self-management (97.6%) and reduce face-to-face consultations (74.6%). GPs recommending apps were more likely to personally use health and fitness apps (OR 3.03), clinical decision apps (OR 3.79), and to believe that apps reduce face-to-face consultations (OR 3.46). GPs not recommending apps more often rated scientific validity as ‘very important’ (84.1% vs 61.4%, p = 0.006).

Nearly half of Portuguese GPs surveyed recommended digital apps, highlighting their potential to support self-management and reduce face-to-face consultation. Broader adoption may depend on fostering greater physician confidence in app use by strengthening the scientific evidence of apps.