Hilde Krogstad1,2, Stine Marie Sundt-Hansen3,4, Marianne Jensen Hjermstad5, Liv Ågot Hågensen6, Stein Kaasa5,7, Jon Håvard Loge5,8, Sunil X Raj3,9, Aslak Steinsbekk10, Kari Sand3,9. 1. European Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. hilde.krogstad@ntnu.no. 2. Cancer Clinic, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. hilde.krogstad@ntnu.no. 3. European Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 4. Department of Medicine, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 5. European Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 6. Coordination Unit Orkdal Region, Orkdal, Norway. 7. Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 8. Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 9. Cancer Clinic, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 10. Department of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Eir version 3 (V3) is an electronic tool for administration of patient-reported outcome measures (Eir-Patient) that immediately presents patient scores on the physician's computer (Eir-Doctor). Perceived usability is an important determinant for successful implementation. The aim of this study was to answer the following research question evaluated at the cancer outpatient clinics, in the patients' home, and at general practitioners' (GPs) offices: What are the number, type, and severity of usability issues evaluated by the patient (Eir-Patient module) and by the physician (Eir-Doctor module)? METHODS: A usability evaluation using observations, think-aloud sessions, individual interviews and focus group interviews in cancer patients and their physicians was conducted. Identified usability issues were graded on a severity scale from 1 (irritant) to 4 (unusable). RESULTS: Overall, 73 Eir registrations were performed by 37 patients, and used by 17 physicians in clinical consultations. All patients were able to complete the Eir-Patient symptom registration. Seventy-two usability issues were identified. None of them were graded as unusable. For the Eir-Patient module, 62% of the identified usability issues was graded as irritant (grade 1), 18% as moderate (grade 2), and 20% as severe (grade 3). For the Eir-Doctor module, 46% of the identified usability issues were graded as irritant, 36% as moderate and 18% as severe. CONCLUSIONS: In the updated Eir version, issues in the severe and moderate categories have been changed, to optimize the usability of using real-time PROMs in clinical practice.
PURPOSE: Eir version 3 (V3) is an electronic tool for administration of patient-reported outcome measures (Eir-Patient) that immediately presents patient scores on the physician's computer (Eir-Doctor). Perceived usability is an important determinant for successful implementation. The aim of this study was to answer the following research question evaluated at the canceroutpatient clinics, in the patients' home, and at general practitioners' (GPs) offices: What are the number, type, and severity of usability issues evaluated by the patient (Eir-Patient module) and by the physician (Eir-Doctor module)? METHODS: A usability evaluation using observations, think-aloud sessions, individual interviews and focus group interviews in cancerpatients and their physicians was conducted. Identified usability issues were graded on a severity scale from 1 (irritant) to 4 (unusable). RESULTS: Overall, 73 Eir registrations were performed by 37 patients, and used by 17 physicians in clinical consultations. All patients were able to complete the Eir-Patient symptom registration. Seventy-two usability issues were identified. None of them were graded as unusable. For the Eir-Patient module, 62% of the identified usability issues was graded as irritant (grade 1), 18% as moderate (grade 2), and 20% as severe (grade 3). For the Eir-Doctor module, 46% of the identified usability issues were graded as irritant, 36% as moderate and 18% as severe. CONCLUSIONS: In the updated Eir version, issues in the severe and moderate categories have been changed, to optimize the usability of using real-time PROMs in clinical practice.
Authors: Ethan Basch; Allison M Deal; Amylou C Dueck; Howard I Scher; Mark G Kris; Clifford Hudis; Deborah Schrag Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thomas M Atkinson; Yuelin Li; Charles W Coffey; Laura Sit; Mary Shaw; Dawn Lavene; Antonia V Bennett; Mike Fruscione; Lauren Rogak; Jennifer Hay; Mithat Gönen; Deborah Schrag; Ethan Basch Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-10-08 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jennifer Stinson; Patrick McGrath; Ellen Hodnett; Brian Feldman; Ciaran Duffy; Adam Huber; Lori Tucker; Ross Hetherington; Shirley Tse; Lynn Spiegel; Sarah Campillo; Navreet Gill; Meghan White Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2010-07-29 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Roxanne E Jensen; Claire F Snyder; Amy P Abernethy; Ethan Basch; Arnold L Potosky; Aaron C Roberts; Deena R Loeffler; Bryce B Reeve Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2013-12-03 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Martin Korzeniowski; Maria Kalyvas; Aamer Mahmud; Carey Shenfield; Christine Tong; Khaled Zaza; Doris Howell; Michael Brundage Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-10-24 Impact factor: 3.359