Richard J Holden1, Noll L Campbell2, Ephrem Abebe3, Daniel O Clark4, Denisha Ferguson5, Kunal Bodke5, Malaz A Boustani6, Christopher M Callahan7. 1. Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; Center for Health Innovation and Implementation Science, Indiana University School of Medicine and Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA. Electronic address: rjholden@iu.edu. 2. Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; Center for Health Innovation and Implementation Science, Indiana University School of Medicine and Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; Purdue University College of Pharmacy, West Lafayette, IN, USA; Eskenazi Health, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 3. Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins University-School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA. 5. Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA. 6. Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; Center for Health Innovation and Implementation Science, Indiana University School of Medicine and Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Sandra Eskenazi Center for Brain Care Innovation, Eskenazi Health, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 7. Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; Sandra Eskenazi Center for Brain Care Innovation, Eskenazi Health, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile health technology can improve medication safety for older adults, for instance, by educating patients about the risks associated with anticholinergic medication use. OBJECTIVE: This study's objective was to test the usability and feasibility of Brain Buddy, a consumer-facing mobile health technology designed to inform and empower older adults to consider the risks and benefits of anticholinergics. METHODS: Twenty-three primary care patients aged ≥60 years and using anticholinergic medications participated in summative, task-based usability testing of Brain Buddy. Self-report usability was assessed by the System Usability Scale and performance-based usability data were collected for each task through observation. A subset of 17 participants contributed data on feasibility, assessed by self-reported attitudes (feeling informed) and behaviors (speaking to a physician), with confirmation following a physician visit. RESULTS: Overall usability was acceptable or better, with 100% of participants completing each Brain Buddy task and a mean System Usability Scale score of 78.8, corresponding to "Good" to "Excellent" usability. Observed usability issues included higher rates of errors, hesitations, and need for assistance on three tasks, particularly those requiring data entry. Among participants contributing to feasibility data, 100% felt better informed after using Brain Buddy and 94% planned to speak to their physician about their anticholinergic related risk. On follow-up, 82% reported having spoken to their physician, a rate independently confirmed by physicians. CONCLUSION: Consumer-facing technology can be a low-cost, scalable intervention to improve older adults' medication safety, by informing and empowering patients. User-centered design and evaluation with demographically heterogeneous clinical samples uncovers correctable usability issues and confirms the value of interventions targeting consumers as agents in shared decision making and behavior change.
BACKGROUND: Mobile health technology can improve medication safety for older adults, for instance, by educating patients about the risks associated with anticholinergic medication use. OBJECTIVE: This study's objective was to test the usability and feasibility of Brain Buddy, a consumer-facing mobile health technology designed to inform and empower older adults to consider the risks and benefits of anticholinergics. METHODS: Twenty-three primary care patients aged ≥60 years and using anticholinergic medications participated in summative, task-based usability testing of Brain Buddy. Self-report usability was assessed by the System Usability Scale and performance-based usability data were collected for each task through observation. A subset of 17 participants contributed data on feasibility, assessed by self-reported attitudes (feeling informed) and behaviors (speaking to a physician), with confirmation following a physician visit. RESULTS: Overall usability was acceptable or better, with 100% of participants completing each Brain Buddy task and a mean System Usability Scale score of 78.8, corresponding to "Good" to "Excellent" usability. Observed usability issues included higher rates of errors, hesitations, and need for assistance on three tasks, particularly those requiring data entry. Among participants contributing to feasibility data, 100% felt better informed after using Brain Buddy and 94% planned to speak to their physician about their anticholinergic related risk. On follow-up, 82% reported having spoken to their physician, a rate independently confirmed by physicians. CONCLUSION: Consumer-facing technology can be a low-cost, scalable intervention to improve older adults' medication safety, by informing and empowering patients. User-centered design and evaluation with demographically heterogeneous clinical samples uncovers correctable usability issues and confirms the value of interventions targeting consumers as agents in shared decision making and behavior change.
Keywords:
Anticholinergics; Behavioral informatics; Digital health (eHealth); Human factors engineering; Information technology; Medications; Mobile health (mHealth); Patient safety; Shared decision making; User-centered design
Authors: Tracy L Mitzner; Jyoti Savla; Walter R Boot; Joseph Sharit; Neil Charness; Sara J Czaja; Wendy A Rogers Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2019-01-09
Authors: R J Fredericksen; L Gibbons; S Brown; T C Edwards; F M Yang; E Fitzsimmons; K Alperovitz-Bichell; M Godfrey; A Wang; A Church; C Gutierrez; E Paez; L Dant; S Loo; M Walcott; M J Mugavero; K Mayer; W C Mathews; D L Patrick; P K Crane; H M Crane Journal: Res Social Adm Pharm Date: 2017-06-20
Authors: Marina Serper; Danielle M McCarthy; Rachel E Patzer; Jennifer P King; Stacy C Bailey; Samuel G Smith; Ruth M Parker; Terry C Davis; Daniela P Ladner; Michael S Wolf Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2013-07-26
Authors: Saee Hamine; Emily Gerth-Guyette; Dunia Faulx; Beverly B Green; Amy Sarah Ginsburg Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2015-02-24 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Ephrem Abebe; Noll L Campbell; Daniel O Clark; Wanzhu Tu; Jordan R Hill; Addison B Harrington; Gracen O'Neal; Kimberly S Trowbridge; Christian Vallejo; Ziyi Yang; Na Bo; Alexxus Knight; Khalid A Alamer; Allie Carter; Robin Valenzuela; Philip Adeoye; Malaz A Boustani; Richard J Holden Journal: Res Social Adm Pharm Date: 2020-10-22
Authors: Hanna J Barton; Ryan J Coller; Shanmugapriya Loganathar; Nawang Singhe; Mary L Ehlenbach; Barbara Katz; Gemma Warner; Michelle M Kelly; Nicole E Werner Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2021-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jennifer A Stoll; Molly Ranahan; Michael T Richbart; Mary K Brennan-Taylor; John S Taylor; Laura Brady; Joseph Cal; Andrew Baumgartner; Robert G Wahler; Ranjit Singh Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2021-05-11