Background: The person-centred remote intervention PROTECT (based on the cornerstones described by Ekman et al) has shown to be meaningful and to impact short term self-efficacy (3 month-follow up). However, at the 6 month-follow the effect was no longer significant. To better understand program outcomes and bridging the knowledge gap on intervention use in remote person-centred interventions the aim was to describe to what extent activities in the PROTECT intervention was used over time and to explore the association between intervention use and program outcome(s). Methods: An explorative study was performed as part of the process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial. Intervention-group participants (n=110) and staff (n=5) were included. Data on program outcomes were collected at baseline, and at the 3- and 6-months follow ups. Moreover, data on intervention use and time using the intervention were collected. Imputations were performed for missing data to avoid underestimation of time use. Analysis is ongoing. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis will be performed. Results: Preliminary findings show that most patients interacted with staff throughout the 6-month intervention, with a peak in contacts during the first intervention month. The association between intervention use and program outcome(s) as well as time using/performing the intervention will be presented. Conclusion: Patients’ and staff’s time use are requested but seldom reported in detail in process-evaluations. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report on remote person-centred intervention activities and time spent on remote person-centred care. The mapping of resource use among both patients and professionals contributes a unique perspective which provides insights for future health economic evaluations of remote interventions. Moreover, the result is expected to contribute to the discussion of how much interaction is needed to reach the intended intervention effect.