BACKGROUND: Patient-administered computerized questionnaires represent a novel tool to assist primary care physicians in the delivery of preventive health care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess patient-reported ease of use with a self-administered tablet computer-based questionnaire in routine clinical care. DESIGN: All patients seen in a university-based primary care practice were asked to provide routine screening information using a touch-screen tablet computer-based questionnaire. Patients reported difficulty using the tablet computer after completion of their first questionnaire. PATIENTS: Ten thousand nine hundred ninety-nine patients completed the questionnaire between January 2004 and January 2006. MEASUREMENTS: We calculated rates of reporting difficulty (no difficulty, some difficulty, or a lot of difficulty) using the tablet computers based on patient age, sex, race, educational attainment, marital status, and number of comorbid medical conditions. We constructed multivariable ordered logistic models to identify predictors of increased self-reported difficulty using the computer. RESULTS: The majority of patients (84%) reported no difficulty using the tablet computers to complete the questionnaire, with only 3% reporting a lot of difficulty. Significant predictors of reporting more difficulty included increasing age [odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.05)]; Asian race (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8-2.9); African American race (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6); less than a high school education (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.6-3.4); and the presence of comorbid medical conditions (1-2: OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.5; > or =3: OR 1.7 95% CI 1.5-2.1). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of primary care patients reported no difficulty using a self-administered tablet computer-based questionnaire. While computerized questionnaires present opportunities to collect routine screening information from patients, attention must be paid to vulnerable groups.
BACKGROUND:Patient-administered computerized questionnaires represent a novel tool to assist primary care physicians in the delivery of preventive health care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess patient-reported ease of use with a self-administered tablet computer-based questionnaire in routine clinical care. DESIGN: All patients seen in a university-based primary care practice were asked to provide routine screening information using a touch-screen tablet computer-based questionnaire. Patients reported difficulty using the tablet computer after completion of their first questionnaire. PATIENTS: Ten thousand nine hundred ninety-nine patients completed the questionnaire between January 2004 and January 2006. MEASUREMENTS: We calculated rates of reporting difficulty (no difficulty, some difficulty, or a lot of difficulty) using the tablet computers based on patient age, sex, race, educational attainment, marital status, and number of comorbid medical conditions. We constructed multivariable ordered logistic models to identify predictors of increased self-reported difficulty using the computer. RESULTS: The majority of patients (84%) reported no difficulty using the tablet computers to complete the questionnaire, with only 3% reporting a lot of difficulty. Significant predictors of reporting more difficulty included increasing age [odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.05)]; Asian race (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8-2.9); African American race (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6); less than a high school education (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.6-3.4); and the presence of comorbid medical conditions (1-2: OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.5; > or =3: OR 1.7 95% CI 1.5-2.1). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of primary care patients reported no difficulty using a self-administered tablet computer-based questionnaire. While computerized questionnaires present opportunities to collect routine screening information from patients, attention must be paid to vulnerable groups.
Authors: A M Jette; A R Davies; P D Cleary; D R Calkins; L V Rubenstein; A Fink; J Kosecoff; R T Young; R H Brook; T L Delbanco Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 1986 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Deborah S Main; Javan Quintela; Rodrigo Araya-Guerra; Sherry Holcomb; Wilson D Pace Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2004 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Rachel Hess; Rebecca C Thurston; Ron D Hays; Chung-Chou H Chang; Stacey N Dillon; Roberta B Ness; Cindy L Bryce; Wishwa N Kapoor; Karen A Matthews Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-07-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Thomas D Sequist; David A Cook; Jennifer S Haas; Ronnie Horner; William M Tierney Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jason Scott Mathias; Ankit Agrawal; Joe Feinglass; Andrew J Cooper; David William Baker; Alok Choudhary Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Derek D Satre; Alexandra N Anderson; Amy S Leibowitz; Tory Levine-Hall; Sally Slome; Jason Flamm; C Bradley Hare; Jennifer McNeely; Constance M Weisner; Michael A Horberg; Paul Volberding; Michael J Silverberg Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: David F Lobach; M Andrew Waters; Shelley Keatts; Kathy L Kimrey; Jennifer V Caldwell; William Rafferty; Sanjay Asrani; Paul P Lee Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2010-11-13
Authors: Eleanor Bimla Schwarz; Sara M Parisi; Sanithia L Williams; Grant J Shevchik; Rachel Hess Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2012 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: D B Herrick; A Nakhasi; B Nelson; S Rice; P A Abbott; A S Saber Tehrani; R E Rothman; H P Lehmann; D E Newman-Toker Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Anja Rogausch; Jörg Sigle; Anna Seibert; Sabine Thüring; Michael M Kochen; Wolfgang Himmel Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2009-06-03 Impact factor: 3.186