BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening programs are challenged by the unsustainable cost of exogenous staff and the relatively low penetration rates. Kiosk systems have increased registration efficiency in various clinical settings and have shown promising results for advancing various public health initiatives. This study evaluated the usability of kiosks within the existing HIV testing program and assessed patients' perceived acceptability of kiosk-based screening in the ED. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: ED patients (n=88) were asked to complete both a Registration Module (intended to integrate into the ED's pending kiosk registration system) and a Risk Assessment Module using a pen-based touchscreen tablet platform. Participants provided feedback upon program completion. All comments, questions, and errors were documented. Kiosk programs tracked time spent on each screen. Quantitative (chi-squared test or t test) and qualitative data analyses were performed. RESULTS: Consented subjects (n=62) were 60% female, 69% were black, the mean ± standard deviation age was 37.8 ± 11.4 years, 52% had a high school degree or less, and 50% reported no prior kiosk experience. Mean time spent on the Registration and Risk Assessment Modules was 2:35 ± 1:24 min and 5:09 ± 1:58 min, respectively. The leading technical challenge identified was login: 84% of patients required assistance. Removal of the login screen reduced times to 1:05 ± 0:36 min and 4:10 ± 1:38 min. Ninety-five percent of subjects reported length of use as "just right," and over 75% of patients found the software easy to use, answered questions without help, and preferred screening on the kiosk to in-person interviews. Favorite aspects of the program included ease of use (52%), privacy (48%), and speed (30%). Sixty-six percent of patients reported there was nothing they disliked or would change. CONCLUSIONS: ED patient response to the kiosk system was favorable. Subjects easily and quickly navigated the program, with the exception of a login screen, which could be eliminated via automated login using ID bracelet scanners.
BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening programs are challenged by the unsustainable cost of exogenous staff and the relatively low penetration rates. Kiosk systems have increased registration efficiency in various clinical settings and have shown promising results for advancing various public health initiatives. This study evaluated the usability of kiosks within the existing HIV testing program and assessed patients' perceived acceptability of kiosk-based screening in the ED. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: ED patients (n=88) were asked to complete both a Registration Module (intended to integrate into the ED's pending kiosk registration system) and a Risk Assessment Module using a pen-based touchscreen tablet platform. Participants provided feedback upon program completion. All comments, questions, and errors were documented. Kiosk programs tracked time spent on each screen. Quantitative (chi-squared test or t test) and qualitative data analyses were performed. RESULTS: Consented subjects (n=62) were 60% female, 69% were black, the mean ± standard deviation age was 37.8 ± 11.4 years, 52% had a high school degree or less, and 50% reported no prior kiosk experience. Mean time spent on the Registration and Risk Assessment Modules was 2:35 ± 1:24 min and 5:09 ± 1:58 min, respectively. The leading technical challenge identified was login: 84% of patients required assistance. Removal of the login screen reduced times to 1:05 ± 0:36 min and 4:10 ± 1:38 min. Ninety-five percent of subjects reported length of use as "just right," and over 75% of patients found the software easy to use, answered questions without help, and preferred screening on the kiosk to in-person interviews. Favorite aspects of the program included ease of use (52%), privacy (48%), and speed (30%). Sixty-six percent of patients reported there was nothing they disliked or would change. CONCLUSIONS: ED patient response to the kiosk system was favorable. Subjects easily and quickly navigated the program, with the exception of a login screen, which could be eliminated via automated login using ID bracelet scanners.
Authors: Jennifer L Wiler; Christopher Gentle; James M Halfpenny; Alan Heins; Abhi Mehrotra; Michael G Mikhail; Diana Fite Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2009-06-25 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Julianna J Jung; Judy B Shahan; Harold A Pollack; Heather S Hairston; Daniel Moring-Parris; G D Kelen; Richard E Rothman Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Bernard M Branson; H Hunter Handsfield; Margaret A Lampe; Robert S Janssen; Allan W Taylor; Sheryl B Lyss; Jill E Clark Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2006-09-22
Authors: Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Kaylin J Beck; Richard E Rothman; Megan Gauvey-Kern; Alonzo Woodfield; Stephen Peterson; Danielle Signer; Charlotte A Gaydos Journal: Int J STD AIDS Date: 2017-01-23 Impact factor: 1.359
Authors: Megan S Orlando; Richard E Rothman; Alonzo Woodfield; Megan Gauvey-Kern; Stephen Peterson; Peter M Hill; Charlotte A Gaydos; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Inocencio Daniel Maramba; Ray Jones; Daniela Austin; Katie Edwards; Edward Meinert; Arunangsu Chatterjee Journal: JMIR Med Inform Date: 2022-03-29
Authors: Jason S Haukoos; Michael S Lyons; Richard E Rothman; Douglas A E White; Emily Hopkins; Meggan Bucossi; Andrew H Ruffner; Rachel M Ancona; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Stephen C Peterson; Danielle Signer; Matthew F Toerper; Mustapha Saheed; Sarah K Pfeil; Tamara Todorovic; Alia A Al-Tayyib; Lucy Bradley-Springer; Jonathan D Campbell; Edward M Gardner; Sarah E Rowan; Allison L Sabel; Mark W Thrun Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-07-01