| Literature DB >> 35416171 |
Yaron Connelly1,2, Roni Lotan1, Yitzhak Brzezinski Sinai3,4, Dan Rolls1, Amir Beker1, Eilone Abensour5, Orit Neudorfer1,6, Daniel Stocki3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preanesthesia evaluation is a basic practice preceding any surgical procedure, aimed at tailoring individualized anesthetic plans for patients, improving safety, and providing patients with educational knowledge and tools in preparation for the surgery day. In the last 2 decades, eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) settings have gradually replaced part of the face-to-face encounters as the platform for preanesthesia communication between doctor and patient, yielding a range of benefits as demonstrated in recent publications. Nevertheless, there is a lack of studies examining the effectiveness of surgical mHealth apps focusing on the pediatric preanesthetic setting and addressing their usability among families.Entities:
Keywords: anesthesia; mHealth; mHealth apps; mHealth usability; mobile health; pediatric setting; pediatrics; preanesthesia; usability analysis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35416171 PMCID: PMC9121218 DOI: 10.2196/34129
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Form Res ISSN: 2561-326X
Figure 1Illustration of various combinations of visual content.
Product-fit actions by strategies and related usability gaps.
| Period | Cases (N) | Duration (days) | Usability gap | Decision on strategy | Decision on action |
| 1: Launching | 286 | 34 | Poor usage rates of basic features | Addressing learnability and accessibility issues by considering the daily habits of end users |
|
| 2 | 56 | 22 | Unsatisfied rates of underuse tendency | Improving efficiency and operability by applying lean and agile thinking for product modification |
|
| 3 | 238 | 54 | Usability gaps between different departments | Addressing memorability problems by sending notifications |
|
| 4: End of implementation | 189 | 31 | N/Aa | N/A |
|
aN/A: not applicable.
Figure 2Illustration of the differences between the 2-screen and 1-screen versions of the app.
Figure 3Illustration of a notification sent to families as part of the campaign.
Patient characteristics by department (N=769).
| Characteristic | Department A | Department B | Department C | Department D | Total | ||||||
|
| |||||||||||
|
| 0-8 | 66 (67.3) | 145 (82.9) | 158 (66.7) | 70 (27) | 439 (57.1) | |||||
|
| 9-18 | 32 (32.7) | 30 (17.1) | 79 (33.3) | 189 (73) | 330 (42.9) | |||||
|
| |||||||||||
|
| Male | 67 (68.4) | 154 (88) | 152 (64.1) | 133 (51.4) | 506 (65.8) | |||||
|
| Female | 31 (31.6) | 21 (12) | 85 (35.9) | 126 (48.6) | 263 (34.2) | |||||
Usability indicators before and after the focused campaign across departments.a
| Department | Period 1 (N=238) | Period 2 (N=56) | Period 3 (N=238) | Periods 1 to 3 (N=580) | Period 4 (N=189) | |||||||||||
|
| n=8 | n=13 | n=44 | n=65 | n=33 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| Opened the link (%) | 88 | 92 | 91 | 91 | 100 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Responded to the evaluation questionnaire (%) | 100 | 67 | 98 | 92 | 91 | 0.01 (1) | .6 | ||||||||
|
| Played the video and started watching (%) | 71 | 58 | 80 | 75 | 73 | 0.38 (1) | .52 | ||||||||
|
| Watched more than 75% of the video (%) | 57 | 58 | 68 | 64 | 52 | 1.46 (1) | .16 | ||||||||
|
| Downloaded informed consent form (%) | 0 | 17 | 35 | 27 | 9 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Downloaded instructions document (%) | 0 | 25 | 23 | 20 | 5 | 0.38 (1) | .38 | ||||||||
|
| Indicated that the app is helpful (%) | 0 | 25 | 45 | 36 | 36 | 0.001 (1) | .56 | ||||||||
|
| n=76 | n=11 | n=56 | n=143 | n=32 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| Opened the link (%) | 86 | 91 | 96 | 90.2 | 91 | 0.005 (1) | .62 | ||||||||
|
| Responded to the evaluation questionnaire (%) | 88 | 100 | 98 | 93 | 100 | 2.14 (1) | .15 | ||||||||
|
| Played the video and started watching (%) | 31 | 80 | 69 | 50.4 | 66 | 2.17 (1) | .1 | ||||||||
|
| Watched more than 75% of the video (%) | 23 | 60 | 61 | 41.9 | 48 | 0.4 (1) | .34 | ||||||||
|
| Downloaded informed consent form (%) | 3 | 40 | 37 | 20.2 | 24 | 0.23 (1) | .4 | ||||||||
|
| Downloaded instructions document (%) | 3 | 40 | 33 | 18.6 | 17 | 0.03 (1) | .55 | ||||||||
|
| Indicated that the app is helpful (%) | 8 | 40 | 44 | 25.6 | 41 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| n=77 | n=25 | n=70 | n=172 | n=65 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| Opened the link (%) | 87 | 88 | 91 | 89 | 91 | 0.17 (1) | .44 | ||||||||
|
| Responded to the evaluation questionnaire (%) | 78 | 96 | 98 | 88.9 | 100 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Played the video and started watching (%) | 16 | 50 | 70 | 43.8 | 81 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Watched more than 75% of the video (%) | 13 | 32 | 63 | 36.6 | 66 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Downloaded informed consent form (%) | 0 | 14 | 16 | 8.5 | 36 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Downloaded instructions document (%) | 0 | 14 | 14 | 7.8 | 34 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Indicated that the app is helpful (%) | 8 | 32 | 42 | 25.5 | 64 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| n=125 | n=7 | n=68 | n=200 | n=59 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| Opened the link (%) | 70 | 86 | 71 | 71 | 83 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Responded to the evaluation questionnaire (%) | 90 | 83 | 92 | 90.1 | 96 | 1.58 (1) | .17 | ||||||||
|
| Played the video and started watching (%) | 44 | 67 | 54 | 48.6 | 61 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Watched more than 75% of the video (%) | 34 | 50 | 44 | 38 | 55 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| Downloaded informed consent form (%) | 1 | 17 | 21 | 8.5 | 8 | 0.004 (1) | .61 | ||||||||
|
| Downloaded instructions document (%) | 2 | 17 | 21 | 9.2 | 10 | 0.05 (1) | .51 | ||||||||
|
| Indicated that the app is helpful (%) | 6 | 50 | 40 | 19 | 43 |
|
| ||||||||
aThe italicized values are statistically significant.
Figure 4Trends in usability indicators throughout all the implementation stages.