Dataset Information

An Intelligent Individualized Cardiovascular App for Risk Elimination (iCARE) for Individuals With Coronary Heart Disease: Development and Usability Testing Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Death and disability from coronary heart disease (CHD) can be largely reduced by improving risk factor management. However, adhering to evidence-based recommendations is challenging and requires interventions at the level of the patient, provider, and health system.

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop an Intelligent Individualized Cardiovascular App for Risk Elimination (iCARE) to facilitate adherence to health behaviors and preventive medications, and to test the usability of iCARE.

Methods

We developed iCARE based on a user-centered design approach, which included 4 phases: (1) function design, (2) iterative design, (3) expert inspections and walkthroughs of the prototypes, and (4) usability testing with end users. The usability testing of iCARE included 2 stages: stage I, which included a task analysis and a usability evaluation (January to March 2019) of the iCARE patient app using the modified Health Information Technology Usability Survey (Health-ITUES); and stage II (June 2020), which used the Health-ITUES among end users who used the app for 6 months. The end users were individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of CHD from 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Beijing, China.

Results

iCARE consists of a patient app, a care provider app, and a cloud platform. It has a set of algorithms that trigger tailored feedback and can send individualized interventions based on data from initial assessment and health monitoring via manual entry or wearable devices. For stage I usability testing, 88 hospitalized patients (72% [63/88] male; mean age 60 [SD 9.9] years) with CHD were included in the study. The mean score of the usability testing was 90.1 (interquartile range 83.3-99.0). Among enrolled participants, 90% (79/88) were satisfied with iCARE; 94% (83/88) and 82% (72/88) reported that iCARE was useful and easy to use, respectively. For stage II usability testing, 61 individuals with CHD (85% [52/61] male; mean age 53 [SD 8.2] years) who were from an intervention arm and used iCARE for at least six months were included. The mean total score on usability testing based on the questionnaire was 89.0 (interquartile distance: 77.0-99.5). Among enrolled participants, 89% (54/61) were satisfied with the use of iCARE, 93% (57/61) perceived it as useful, and 70% (43/61) as easy to use.

Conclusions

This study developed an intelligent, individualized, evidence-based, and theory-driven app (iCARE) to improve patients' adherence to health behaviors and medication management. iCARE was identified to be highly acceptable, useful, and easy to use among individuals with a diagnosis of CHD.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-INR-16010242; https://tinyurl.com/2p8bkrew.

SUBMITTER: Chen Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8713096 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMobile health-based individualized interventions have shown potential effects in managing cardiovascular risk factors. This study aims to assess whether or not mHealth based individualized interventions delivered by an Individualized Cardiovascular Application system for Risk Elimination (iCARE) could reduce the incidence of major cardiovascular events in individuals with coronary heart disease.MethodsThis study is a large-scale, multi-center, parallel-group, open-label, randomized controlled clinical trial. This study will be conducted from September 2019 to December 2025. A total of 2820 patients with coronary heart disease will be recruited from two clinical sites and equally randomized into three groups: the intervention group and two control groups. All participants will be informed of six-time points (at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after discharge) for follow-up visits. Over a course of 36 months, patients who are randomized to the intervention arm will receive individualized interventions delivered by a fully functional iCARE that using various visualization methods such as comics, videos, pictures, text to provide individualized interventions in addition to standard care. Patients randomized to control group 1 will receive interventions delivered by a modified iCARE that only presented in text in addition to routine care. Control group 2 will only receive routine care. The primary outcome is the incidence of major cardiovascular events within 3 years of discharge. Main secondary outcomes include changes in health behaviors, medication adherence, and cardiovascular health score.DiscussionIf the iCARE trial indeed demonstrates positive effects on patients with coronary heart disease, it will provide empirical evidence for supporting secondary preventive care in this population. Results will inform the design of future research focused on mHealth-based, theory-driven, intelligent, and individualized interventions for cardiovascular risk management.Trial registrationTrial registered 24th December 2016 with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-INR-16010242). URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=17398 .

Project description:BACKGROUND:Distress is prevalent in cancer survivors. Stress management interventions can reduce distress and improve quality of life for cancer patients, but many people with cancer are unfortunately not offered or able to attend such in-person stress management interventions. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to develop an evidence-based stress management intervention for patients living with cancer that can be delivered electronically with wide reach and dissemination. This paper describes the design and development process of a technology-based stress management intervention for cancer survivors, including the exploration phase, intervention content development, iterative software development (including design, development, and formative evaluation of low- and high-level prototypes), and security and privacy considerations. METHODS:Design and development processes were iterative and performed in close collaboration with key stakeholders (N=48). In the exploration phase, identifying needs and requirements for the intervention, 28 participants gave input, including male and female cancer survivors (n=11) representing a wide age range (31-81 years) and cancer diagnoses, healthcare providers (n=8) including psychosocial oncology experts, and eHealth experts (n=9) including information technology design and developers. To ensure user involvement in each phase various user-centered design and service design methods were included, such as interviews, usability testing, and think aloud processes. Overall, participants were involved usability testing in the software development and formative evaluation phase, including cancer survivors (n=6), healthy volunteers (n=7), health care providers (n=2), and eHealth experts (n=5). Intervention content was developed by stress management experts based on well-known cognitive behavioral stress management strategies and adjusted to electronic format through multiple iterations with stakeholders. Privacy and security issues were considered throughout. RESULTS:The design and development process identified a variety of stakeholder requirements. Cancer survivors preferred stress management through a mobile app rather than through a personal computer (PC) and identified usefulness, easy access, user friendliness, use of easily understandable language, and many brief sections rather than longer ones as important components of the intervention. These requirements were also supported by recommendations from health care providers and eHealth experts. The final intervention was named StressProffen and the hospital Privacy and Security Protection Committee was part of the final intervention approval to also ensure anchoring in the hospital organization. CONCLUSIONS:Interventions, even evidence-based, have little impact if not actively used. This study illustrates how user-centered design and service design can be applied to identify and incorporate essential stakeholder aspects in the entire design and development process. In combination with evidence-based concepts, this process facilitated development of a stress management intervention truly designed for the end users, in this case, cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02939612; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02939612 (Archived at WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71l9HcfcB).

Project description:BackgroundReporting of medication errors is one of the essential mechanisms to identify risky health care systems and practices that lead to medication errors. Unreported medication errors are a real issue; one of the identified causes is a burdensome medication error reporting system. An anonymous and user-friendly mobile app for reporting medication errors could be an alternative method of reporting medication error in busy health care settings.ObjectiveThe objective of this paper is to report usability testing of the Medication Error Reporting App (MERA), a mobile app for reporting medication errors anonymously.MethodsQuantitative and qualitative methods were employed involving 45 different testers (pharmacists, doctors, and nurses) from a large tertiary hospital in Malaysia. Quantitative data was retrieved using task performance and rating of MERA and qualitative data were retrieved through focus group discussions. Three sessions, with 15 testers each session, were conducted from January to March 2018.ResultsThe majority of testers were pharmacists (23/45, 51%), female (35/45, 78%), and the mean age was 36 (SD 9) years. A total of 135 complete reports were successfully submitted by the testers (three reports per tester) and 79.2% (107/135) of the reports were correct. There was significant improvement in mean System Usability Scale scores in each session of the development process (P<.001) and mean time to report medication errors using the app was not significantly different between each session (P=.70) with an overall mean time of 6.7 (SD 2.4) minutes. Testers found the app easy to use, but doctors and nurses were unfamiliar with terms used especially medication process at which error occurred and type of error. Although, testers agreed the app can be used in the future for reporting, they were apprehensive about security, validation, and abuse of feedback featured in the app.ConclusionsMERA can be used to report medication errors easily by various health care personnel and it has the capacity to provide feedback on reporting. However, education on medication error reporting should be provided to doctors and nurses in Malaysia and the security of the app needs to be established to boost reporting by this method.

Project description:BackgroundSafety planning is a brief intervention that has become an accepted practice in many clinical settings to help prevent suicide. Even though it is quick compared to other approaches, it frequently requires 20 min or more to complete, which can impede adoption. A self-administered, Web-based safety planning application could potentially reduce clinician time, help promote standardization and quality, and provide enhanced ability to share the created plan.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to design, build, and test the usability of a Web-based, self-administered safety planning application.MethodsWe employed a user-centered software design strategy led by a multidisciplinary team. The application was tested for usability with a target sample of suicidal patients. Detailed observations, structured usability ratings, and Think Aloud procedures were used. Suicidal ideation intensity and perceived ability to cope were assessed pre-post engagement with the Web application.ResultsA total of 30 participants were enrolled. Usability ratings were generally strong, and all patients successfully built a safety plan. However, the completeness of the safety plan varied. The mean number of steps completed was 5.5 (SD 0.9) out of 6, with 90% (27/30) of participants completing at least 5 steps and 67% (20/30) completing all 6 steps. Some safety planning steps were viewed as inapplicable to some individuals. Some confusion in instructions led to modifications to improve understandability of each step. Ratings of suicide intensity after completion of the application were significantly lower than preratings, pre: mean 5.11 (SD 2.9) versus post: mean 4.46 (SD 3.0), t27=2.49, P=.02. Ratings of ability to cope with suicidal thoughts after completion of the application were higher than preratings, with the difference approaching statistical significance, pre: mean 5.93 (SD 2.9), post: mean 6.64 (SD 2.4), t27=-2.03, P=.05.ConclusionsWe have taken the first step toward identifying the components needed to maximize usability of a self-administered, Web-based safety planning application. Results support initial consideration of the application as an adjunct to clinical contact. This allows for the clinician or other personnel to provide clarification, when needed, to help the patient build the plan, and to help review and revise the draft.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Supporting patient engagement and empowerment is increasingly seen as essential in providing person-centered health care to people with chronic illness. Mobile apps helping patients reflect on their concerns as preparation for consultations with their health care providers can have beneficial effects on the consultation quality. However, apps focusing on empowerment and personal strengths are still scarce. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to (1) develop a mobile app to support patients with rheumatic diseases in reflecting on their strengths in preparation for consultations with health care providers and (2) explore patients' perceived usability of the app in a nonclinical test setting. METHODS:A prototype app was developed based on input from patients and health care providers, as reported in previous studies. The app was designed for use in self-management support settings aiming to promote awareness of strengths and to focus attention on strengths in the patient-health care provider dialogue. The features included in the prototype were as follows: (1) introduction to the topic of strengths, (2) list of examples of strengths to promote reflection and registration of own strengths, (3) summary of registered strengths, (4) value-based goal setting, (5) linking of strengths to goals, (6) summary of all registrations, and (7) options to share summary digitally or as a print version. In this study, the app was refined through a formative evaluation with patients and health care providers recruited from a specialized rheumatology hospital unit. Patients' perceptions of the app's usability were explored in a test setting with self-report measurements and semistructured interviews. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed with directed content analysis. Data from questionnaires were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS:Developmental and formative evaluation included 18 patients and 7 health care providers. The evaluation resulted in minor adjustments to the prototype but no major changes in features. The usability testing included 12 patients. All participants found the usability acceptable; the median score on the System Usability Scale was 86.3 (range 70-100). All reported that it was meaningful and relevant to use the app. Out of 12 participants, 9 (75%) reported becoming more aware of their own strengths by using the app; 1 (8%) disagreed and 2 (17%) provided a neutral response. The results on the goal-related feature were mixed, with half of the patients finding it useful to link strengths to concrete goals. A statistically significant positive change from pre- to postintervention was identified on measures of self-efficacy and negative emotions. CONCLUSIONS:In this formative evaluation of a mobile app to promote patients' reflections on their strengths, patients perceived the app as meaningful and supporting awareness. The results suggest the usefulness of building in functionality to support use of strengths and goal attainment. Further studies on efficacy and usability in a clinical setting, including health care providers, are needed.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are posing a huge burden on health care systems worldwide. Mobile apps can deliver behavior change interventions for chronic disease prevention on a large scale, but current evidence for their effectiveness is limited.ObjectiveThis paper reported on the development and user testing of a mobile app that aims at increasing risk awareness and engaging users in behavior change. It would form part of an intervention for primary prevention of CVD and T2DM.MethodsThe theoretical framework of the app design was based on the Behaviour Change Wheel, combined with the capability, opportunity, and motivation for behavior change system and the behavior change techniques from the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (version 1). In addition, evidence from scientific literature has guided the development process. The prototype was tested for user-friendliness via an iterative approach. We conducted semistructured interviews with individuals in the target populations, which included the System Usability Scale. We transcribed and analyzed the interviews using descriptive statistics for the System Usability Scale and thematic analysis to identify app features that improved utility and usability.ResultsThe target population was Australians aged ≥45 years. The app included 4 core modules (risk score, goal setting, health measures, and education). In these modules, users learned about their risk for CVD and T2DM; set goals for smoking, alcohol consumption, diet, and physical activity; and tracked them. In total, we included 12 behavior change techniques. We conducted 2 rounds of usability testing, each involving 5 participants. The average age of the participants was 58 (SD 8) years. Totally, 60% (6/10) of the participants owned iPhone Operating System phones, and 40% (4/10) of them owned Android phones. In the first round, we identified a technical issue that prevented 30% (3/10) of the participants from completing the registration process. Among the 70% (7/10) of participants who were able to complete the registration process, 71% (5/7) rated the app above average, based on the System Usability Scale. During the interviews, we identified some issues related to functionality, content, and language and clarity. We used the participants' feedback to improve these aspects.ConclusionsWe developed the app using behavior change theory and scientific evidence. The user testing allowed us to identify and remove technical errors and integrate additional functions into the app, which the participants had requested. Next, we will evaluate the feasibility of the revised version of the app developed through this design process and usability testing.

Project description:BACKGROUND:After a mobile health (mHealth) app is created, an important step is to evaluate the usability of the app before it is released to the public. There are multiple ways of conducting a usability study, one of which is collecting target users' feedback with a usability questionnaire. Different groups have used different questionnaires for mHealth app usability evaluation: The commonly used questionnaires are the System Usability Scale (SUS) and Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). However, the SUS and PSSUQ were not designed to evaluate the usability of mHealth apps. Self-written questionnaires are also commonly used for evaluation of mHealth app usability but they have not been validated. OBJECTIVE:The goal of this project was to develop and validate a new mHealth app usability questionnaire. METHODS:An mHealth app usability questionnaire (MAUQ) was designed by the research team based on a number of existing questionnaires used in previous mobile app usability studies, especially the well-validated questionnaires. MAUQ, SUS, and PSSUQ were then used to evaluate the usability of two mHealth apps: an interactive mHealth app and a standalone mHealth app. The reliability and validity of the new questionnaire were evaluated. The correlation coefficients among MAUQ, SUS, and PSSUQ were calculated. RESULTS:In this study, 128 study participants provided responses to the questionnaire statements. Psychometric analysis indicated that the MAUQ has three subscales and their internal consistency reliability is high. The relevant subscales correlated well with the subscales of the PSSUQ. The overall scale also strongly correlated with the PSSUQ and SUS. Four versions of the MAUQ were created in relation to the type of app (interactive or standalone) and target user of the app (patient or provider). A website has been created to make it convenient for mHealth app developers to use this new questionnaire in order to assess the usability of their mHealth apps. CONCLUSIONS:The newly created mHealth app usability questionnaire-MAUQ-has the reliability and validity required to assess mHealth app usability.