| Literature DB >> 34159299 |
Santiago Márquez Fosser1,2, Nadar Mahmoud1, Bettina Habib1, Daniala L Weir1, Fiona Chan1, Rola El Halabieh1, Jeanne Vachon1, Manish Thakur1, Thai Tran1, Melissa Bustillo1, Caroline Beauchamp3, André Bonnici3, David L Buckeridge1,2, Robyn Tamblyn1,2,4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To outline the development of a software solution to improve medication management after hospital discharge, including its design, data sources, intrinsic features, and to evaluate the usability and the perception of use by end-users.Entities:
Keywords: medication therapy management; mobile applications; patient empowerment; usability
Year: 2021 PMID: 34159299 PMCID: PMC8211568 DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooab037
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JAMIA Open ISSN: 2574-2531
Figure 1.(a) SAM home screen—desktop view, displaying the medication list; (b) mobile view.
Figure 2.Drug information through patient-friendly monographs.
Figure 3.Patient alert resolution drop-down menu.
Figure 4.Weekly medication schedule.
Figure 5.Side effects: (a) of a single drug; (b) of all prescribed and dispensed medications; (c) drug–drug interaction checker.
Figure 6.(a) Messaging service; (b) pharmacist dashboard.
Baseline user characteristics
| Characteristic | Patients | Caregivers |
|---|---|---|
| Sample ( | 23 | 8 |
| Age, years (mean) | 54.4 (SD 18.8) | 55 (SD 10.9) |
| Sex | ||
| Female | 13 (56.5%) | 7 (87.5%) |
| Male | 10 (43.5%) | 1 (12.5%) |
| Hospital | ||
| RVH | 15 (65.2%) | 5 (62.5%) |
| MGH | 8 (34.8%) | 3 (37.5%) |
| Language | ||
| English | 18 (78.3%) | 7 (87.5%) |
| French | 5 (21.7%) | 1 (12.5%) |
Usability and user performance
| Task to perform | Tests ( | Severity level 1 | Severity level 2 | Severity level 3 | Severity level 4 | Severity scale, mean (SD) | Success-error rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Login | 29 | 27 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1.14 (SD 0.51) | 100% |
| Search for more information | 31 | 26 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 1.32 (SD 0.74) | 100% |
| Send a message | 31 | 23 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1.35 (SD 0.65) | 100% |
| Adding a medication review | 31 | 19 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 1.81 (SD 1.09) | 90.3% |
| Side effects information | 23 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1.13 (SD 0.45) | 100% |
| Side effects checker | 21 | 12 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 1.71 (SD 0.88) | 100% |
| Interaction checker | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1.17 (SD 0.37) | 100% |
| Overall | 172 | 133 | 12 | 24 | 3 | 1.4 (SD 0.79) | 98.3% |
Severity scale rated in 4 levels as (1) the user can do it perfectly, without any help, (2) the user can do it with difficulty but without help, (3) the user can do it with difficulty and help, and (4) the user cannot do it.
Self-perception satisfaction by patient end-users (12 responses)
| Domain | Mean (SD) |
|---|---|
| Behavioral intention | 5.17 (SD 2.12) |
| Perceived usefulness | 5.29 (SD 2.11) |
| Subjective norm | 3.81 (SD 1.74) |
| Relevance | 4.86 (SD 1.78) |
| Output quality | 5.44 (SD 1.65) |
| Result demonstrability | 5.06 (SD 1.82) |
| Perceived ease of use | 5.65 (SD 2.02) |
| Computer self-efficacy | 5.60 (SD 2.00) |
| Perceived enjoyment | 5.24 (SD 1.97) |