Background:

Young people are at risk of poor sexual health and are, therefore, in need of comprehensive, effective sexual health education. Young people are confident and constant users of digital technology, such as the internet and mobile phones, and there are many innovative possibilities for sexual health education involving these technologies.

Objectives:

To summarise evidence on effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanism of action of interactive digital interventions (IDIs) for sexual health; optimal practice for intervention development; contexts for successful implementation; research methods for digital intervention evaluation; and the future potential of sexual health promotion via digital media.

Design:

Literature review of evidence on digital interventions for sexual health for young people, integrating the findings with the views of young people, parents and experts in digital media/sexual health. IDIs are defined as digital media programmes that provide health information and tailored decision support, behaviour-change support and/or emotional support. We focus on sexual well-being for young people aged 13–24 years in the UK.

Results:

There are many imaginative IDIs for sexual health promotion, but few interventions address issues that are important to young people, such as sexual pleasure and relationships. It is vital to collaborate with young people and to use Behaviour-Change Theory in designing interventions. We located 19 randomised controlled trials of IDIs for sexual health promotion for young people, finding a moderate effect on sexual health knowledge [standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.92], a small effect on confidence (self-efficacy) (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.20) and a positive effect on sexual behaviour (odds ratio 1.28, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.61), but no significant effects on safer sex intention or biological outcomes. One study suggests that IDIs may be as good as face-to-face interventions for sexual health knowledge and safer sex intention. There are no existing data on the cost-effectiveness of IDIs for sexual health promotion. The impact of an IDI will be determined by the proportion of the target population reached, intervention efficacy, adoption in a setting, how well it is delivered and maintenance/sustainability. All of these elements must be addressed for IDIs to be successful. More collaboration is needed to capitalise on the knowledge of users and stakeholders, the design and software skills of the commercial sector and the theoretical expertise and evaluation skills of academia.

Conclusions:

IDIs are effective for knowledge acquisition and sexual behaviour, and could usefully contribute to sexual health education in schools, in clinic settings and online; however, there are obstacles to overcome, such as access to information technology and ensuring the quality and safety of interventions.

Future work:

More evidence is needed on the best designs for interventions (e.g. choice of behaviour-change mechanisms and interactive features) and the best models of delivery (e.g. setting, modes of delivery, methods of facilitation and support for engagement) to improve sexual behaviour, biological outcomes and sexual well-being in a cost-effective way.

Funding:

The National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.

Article history

The research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the PHR programme as project number 11/3009/04. The contractual start date was in March 2013. The final report began editorial review in September 2014 and was accepted for publication in June 2015. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The PHR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors’ report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.

Declared competing interests of authors

Julia Bailey, Elizabeth Murray and Caroline Free have developed interactive digital interventions and lead programmes of research to evaluate interventions. None of the authors has received fees or sponsorship from organisations which stand to make a profit from the development and implementation of digital interventions.