Cargando…
Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study
BACKGROUND: Faecal incontinence (FI) is prevalent in 15–20% of elderly individuals and is frequently monitored in clinical trials and practice. Bowel diaries are the most common way to document FI, but, in clinical practice, are mainly used as paper-based versions. Electronic diaries (eDiaries) offe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8962247/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35346170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01818-5 |
_version_ | 1784677755940503552 |
---|---|
author | Lehmann, Jens Schreyer, Isabel Riedl, David Tschuggnall, Michael Giesinger, Johannes M. Ninkovic, Marjiana Huth, Marcus Kronberger, Irmgard Rumpold, Gerhard Holzner, Bernhard |
author_facet | Lehmann, Jens Schreyer, Isabel Riedl, David Tschuggnall, Michael Giesinger, Johannes M. Ninkovic, Marjiana Huth, Marcus Kronberger, Irmgard Rumpold, Gerhard Holzner, Bernhard |
author_sort | Lehmann, Jens |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Faecal incontinence (FI) is prevalent in 15–20% of elderly individuals and is frequently monitored in clinical trials and practice. Bowel diaries are the most common way to document FI, but, in clinical practice, are mainly used as paper-based versions. Electronic diaries (eDiaries) offer many potential benefits over paper-based diaries. The aim of this study was to develop and test an eDiary to document FI. METHODS: We migrated a paper FI diary to an eDiary app based on the Computer-based Health Evaluation System (CHES). To assess usability, we conducted functionality and usability tests at two time points in a sample of patients with FI. In the first assessment, the eDiary functionalities were tested, patients completed the System Usability Scale (SUS, range 0–100) and compared the paper diary with the eDiary. We set a threshold for minimum acceptable average usability at 70 points. Patients were then instructed to use the eDiary for 2 days at home and contacted to report on their usage and completed the SUS a second time. RESULTS: We recruited a sample of N = 14 patients to use the eDiary. All patients were able to use all functionalities of the eDiary and only a few patients with lower technological literacy or access to devices (n = 3) needed initial assistance. The mean usability rating given at the first time point was high with 88 points (SD 18, 95% CI 78.2–96.8) and most patients (n = 10) reported they would prefer the eDiary over the paper-based version. Nine patients (n = 9) participated in the follow-up assessment and the mean SUS rating at the second time point was 97 points (SD 7, 95% CI 92.8–100). CONCLUSION: The eDiary showed excellent usability scores for the assessment of FI at both assessments. Generally, patients preferred the eDiary over the paper-based version. We recommend the eDiary for usage with patients who own and use a smartphone and discuss potential solutions for patients with lower technological literacy or access. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-01818-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8962247 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89622472022-03-30 Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study Lehmann, Jens Schreyer, Isabel Riedl, David Tschuggnall, Michael Giesinger, Johannes M. Ninkovic, Marjiana Huth, Marcus Kronberger, Irmgard Rumpold, Gerhard Holzner, Bernhard BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research BACKGROUND: Faecal incontinence (FI) is prevalent in 15–20% of elderly individuals and is frequently monitored in clinical trials and practice. Bowel diaries are the most common way to document FI, but, in clinical practice, are mainly used as paper-based versions. Electronic diaries (eDiaries) offer many potential benefits over paper-based diaries. The aim of this study was to develop and test an eDiary to document FI. METHODS: We migrated a paper FI diary to an eDiary app based on the Computer-based Health Evaluation System (CHES). To assess usability, we conducted functionality and usability tests at two time points in a sample of patients with FI. In the first assessment, the eDiary functionalities were tested, patients completed the System Usability Scale (SUS, range 0–100) and compared the paper diary with the eDiary. We set a threshold for minimum acceptable average usability at 70 points. Patients were then instructed to use the eDiary for 2 days at home and contacted to report on their usage and completed the SUS a second time. RESULTS: We recruited a sample of N = 14 patients to use the eDiary. All patients were able to use all functionalities of the eDiary and only a few patients with lower technological literacy or access to devices (n = 3) needed initial assistance. The mean usability rating given at the first time point was high with 88 points (SD 18, 95% CI 78.2–96.8) and most patients (n = 10) reported they would prefer the eDiary over the paper-based version. Nine patients (n = 9) participated in the follow-up assessment and the mean SUS rating at the second time point was 97 points (SD 7, 95% CI 92.8–100). CONCLUSION: The eDiary showed excellent usability scores for the assessment of FI at both assessments. Generally, patients preferred the eDiary over the paper-based version. We recommend the eDiary for usage with patients who own and use a smartphone and discuss potential solutions for patients with lower technological literacy or access. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-01818-5. BioMed Central 2022-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8962247/ /pubmed/35346170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01818-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Lehmann, Jens Schreyer, Isabel Riedl, David Tschuggnall, Michael Giesinger, Johannes M. Ninkovic, Marjiana Huth, Marcus Kronberger, Irmgard Rumpold, Gerhard Holzner, Bernhard Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
title | Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
title_full | Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
title_fullStr | Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
title_full_unstemmed | Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
title_short | Usability evaluation of the Computer-Based Health Evaluation System (CHES) eDiary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
title_sort | usability evaluation of the computer-based health evaluation system (ches) ediary for patients with faecal incontinence: a pilot study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8962247/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35346170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01818-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lehmannjens usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT schreyerisabel usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT riedldavid usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT tschuggnallmichael usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT giesingerjohannesm usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT ninkovicmarjiana usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT huthmarcus usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT kronbergerirmgard usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT rumpoldgerhard usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy AT holznerbernhard usabilityevaluationofthecomputerbasedhealthevaluationsystemchesediaryforpatientswithfaecalincontinenceapilotstudy |