A Patient-Facing Diabetes Dashboard Embedded in a Patient Web Portal: Design Sprint and Usability Testing

Using the technology acceptance model to assess clinician perceptions and experiences with a rheumatoid arthritis outcomes dashboard: qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Improving shared decision-making using a treat-to-target approach, including the use of clinical outcome measures, is important to providing high quality care for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We developed an Electronic Health Record (EHR) integrated, patient-facing sidecar dashboard application that displays RA outcomes, medications, and lab results for use during clinical visits ("RA PRO dashboard"). The purpose of this study was to assess clinician perceptions and experiences using the dashboard in a university rheumatology clinic.

METHODS

We conducted focus group (FG) discussions with clinicians who had access to the dashboard as part of a randomized, stepped-wedge pragmatic trial. FGs explored clinician perceptions towards the usability, acceptability, and usefulness of the dashboard. FG data were analyzed thematically using deductive and inductive techniques; generated themes were categorized into the domains of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).

RESULTS

3 FG discussions were conducted with a total of 13 clinicians. Overall, clinicians were enthusiastic about the dashboard and expressed the usefulness of visualizing RA outcome trajectories in a graphical format for motivating patients, enhancing patient understanding of their RA outcomes, and improving communication about medications. Major themes that emerged from the FG analysis as barriers to using the dashboard included inconsistent collection of RA outcomes leading to sparse data in the dashboard and concerns about explaining RA outcomes, especially to patients with fibromyalgia. Other challenges included time constraints and technical difficulties refreshing the dashboard to display real-time data. Methods for integrating the dashboard into the visit varied: some clinicians used the dashboard at the beginning of the visit as they documented RA outcomes; others used it at the end to justify changes to therapy; and a few shared it only with stable patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides valuable insights into clinicians' perceptions and experiences with the RA PRO dashboard. The dashboard showed promise in enhancing patient-clinician communication, shared decision-making, and overall acceptance among clinicians. Addressing challenges related to data collection, education, and tailoring dashboard use to specific patient populations will be crucial for maximizing its potential impact on RA care. Further research and ongoing improvements in dashboard design and implementation are warranted to ensure its successful integration into routine clinical practice.

Evaluating the Usability of an mHealth App for Empowering Cancer Survivors With Disabilities: Heuristic Evaluation and Usability Testing

BACKGROUND

More than 18 million cancer survivors are living in the United States. The effects of cancer and its treatments can have cognitive, psychological, physical, and social consequences that many survivors find incredibly disabling. Posttreatment support is often unavailable or underused, especially for survivors living with disabilities. This leaves them to deal with new obstacles and struggles on their own, oftentimes feeling lost during this transition. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have been shown to effectively aid cancer survivors in dealing with many of the aftereffects of cancer and its treatments; these interventions hold immense potential for survivors living with disabilities. We developed a prototype for WeCanManage, an mHealth-delivered self-management intervention to empower cancer survivors living with disabilities through problem-solving, mindfulness, and self-advocacy training.

OBJECTIVE

Our study conducted a heuristic evaluation of the WeCanManage high-fidelity prototype and assessed its usability among cancer survivors with known disabilities.

METHODS

We evaluated the prototype using Nielsen's 10 principles of heuristic evaluation with 22 human-computer interaction university students. On the basis of the heuristic evaluation findings, we modified the prototype and conducted usability testing on 10 cancer survivors with a variety of known disabilities, examining effectiveness, efficiency, usability, and satisfaction, including a completion of the modified System Usability Scale (SUS).

RESULTS

The findings from the heuristic evaluation were mostly favorable, highlighting the need for a help guide, addressing accessibility concerns, and enhancing the navigation experience. After usability testing, the average SUS score was 81, indicating a good-excellent design. The participants in the usability testing sample expressed positive reactions toward the app's design, educational content and videos, and the available means of connecting with others. They identified areas for improvement, such as improving accessibility, simplifying navigation within the community forums, and providing a more convenient method to access the help guide.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, usability testing showed positive results for the design of WeCanManage. The course content and features helped participants feel heard, understood, and less alone.

Patient Portals as Facilitators of Engagement in Patients With Diabetes and Chronic Heart Disease: Scoping Review of Usage and Usability

BACKGROUND

Patient portals have the potential to improve care for chronically ill patients by engaging them in their treatment. These platforms can work, for example, as a standalone self-management intervention or a tethered link to treatment providers in routine care. Many different types of portals are available for different patient groups, providing various features.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to summarize the current literature on patient portals for patients with diabetes mellitus and chronic heart disease regarding usage behavior and usability.

METHODS

We conducted this review according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement for scoping reviews. We performed database searches using PubMed, PsycInfo, and CINAHL, as well as additional searches in reviews and reference lists. We restricted our search to 2010. Qualitative and quantitative studies, and studies using both approaches that analyzed usage behavior or usability of patient portals were eligible. We mapped portal features according to broad thematic categories and summarized the results of the included studies separately according to outcome and research design.

RESULTS

After screening, we finally included 85 studies. Most studies were about patients with diabetes, included patients younger than 65 years, and were conducted in the United States. Portal features were categorized into educational/general information, reminder, monitoring, interactivity, personal health information, electronic/personal health record, and communication. Portals mostly provided educational, monitoring, and communication-related features. Studies reported on usage behavior including associated variables, usability dimensions, and suggestions for improvement. Various ways of reporting usage frequency were identified. A noticeable decline in portal usage over time was reported frequently. Age was most frequently studied in association with portal use, followed by gender, education, and eHealth literacy. Younger age and higher education were often associated with higher portal use. In two-thirds of studies reporting on portal usability, the portals were rated as user friendly and comprehensible, although measurement and reporting were heterogeneous. Portals were considered helpful for self-management through positive influences on motivation, health awareness, and behavioral changes. Helpful features for self-management were educational/general information and monitoring. Barriers to portal use were general (eg, aspects of design or general usability), related to specific situations during portal use (eg, login procedure), or not portal specific (eg, user skills and preferences). Frequent themes were aspects of design, usability, and technology. Suggestions for improvement were mainly related to technical issues and need for support.

CONCLUSIONS

The current state of research emphasizes the importance of involving patients in the development and evaluation of patient portals. The consideration of various research designs in a scoping review is helpful for a deeper understanding of usage behavior and usability. Future research should focus on the role of disease burden, and usage behavior and usability among older patients.

Empowering patients to address diabetes care gaps: formative usability testing of a novel patient portal intervention

Objective

The aim of this study was to design and assess the formative usability of a novel patient portal intervention designed to empower patients with diabetes to initiate orders for diabetes-related monitoring and preventive services.

Materials and Methods

We used a user-centered Design Sprint methodology to create our intervention prototype and assess its usability with 3 rounds of iterative testing. Participants (5/round) were presented with the prototype and asked to perform common, standardized tasks using think-aloud procedures. A facilitator rated task performance using a scale: (1) completed with ease, (2) completed with difficulty, and (3) failed. Participants completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) scored 0-worst to 100-best. All testing occurred remotely via Zoom.

Results

We identified 3 main categories of usability issues: distrust about the automated system, content concerns, and layout difficulties. Changes included improving clarity about the ordering process and simplifying language; however, design constraints inherent to the electronic health record system limited our ability to respond to all usability issues (eg, could not modify fixed elements in layout). Percent of tasks completed with ease across each round were 67%, 60%, and 80%, respectively. Average SUS scores were 87, 74, and 93, respectively. Across rounds, participants found the intervention valuable and appreciated the concept of patient-initiated ordering.

Conclusions

Through iterative user-centered design and testing, we improved the usability of the patient portal intervention. A tool that empowers patients to initiate orders for disease-specific services as part of their existing patient portal account has potential to enhance the completion of recommended health services and improve clinical outcomes.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of patient education through patient portals

Objective

The objective of this study was to systematically review all literature studying the effect of patient education on patient engagement through patient portals.

Introduction

Patient portals provide patients access to health records, lab results, medication refills, educational materials, secure messaging, appointment scheduling, and telehealth visits, allowing patients to take a more active role in their health care decisions and management. A debate remains around whether these additional aids actually improve patient engagement and increase their ability to manage their own health conditions. This systematic review looks specifically at the effect of educational materials included in patient portals.

Materials and Methods

In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, the literature search was mapped across 5 databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, PsychINFO, Embase), and implemented on June 2, 2020.

Results

Fifty-two studies were included in the review. Forty-six (88.5%) reported rates of patient utilization of educational resources in the patient portal. Thirty (57.9%) shared patients' perceptions of the usefulness of the education materials. Twenty-one (40.4%) reported changes in health outcomes following educational interventions through the patient portal. This review found that efforts are indeed being made to raise awareness of educational resources in patient portals, that patients are increasingly utilizing these resources, that patients are finding them useful, and that they are improving health outcomes.

Conclusion

It seems that patient portals are becoming a powerful tool for patient education and engagement, and show promise as a means of achieving the quadruple aim of healthcare. Moving forward, research should establish more uniform methods of measurement in order to strengthen the literature surrounding the effectiveness of patient education through patient portals.

Usability Evaluation of Dashboards: A Systematic Literature Review of Tools

Introduction

In recent years, the use of dashboards in healthcare has been considered an effective approach for the visual presentation of information to support clinical and administrative decisions. Effective and efficient use of dashboards in clinical and managerial processes requires a framework for the design and development of tools based on usability principles.

Objectives

The present study is aimed at investigating the existing questionnaires used for the usability evaluation framework of dashboards and at presenting more specific usability criteria for evaluating dashboards.

Methods

This systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, without any time restrictions. The final search of articles was performed on September 2, 2022. Data collection was performed using a data extraction form, and the content of selected studies was analyzed based on the dashboard usability criteria.

Results

After reviewing the full text of relevant articles, a total of 29 studies were selected according to the inclusion criteria. Regarding the questionnaires used in the selected studies, researcher-made questionnaires were used in five studies, while 25 studies applied previously used questionnaires. The most widely used questionnaires were the System Usability Scale (SUS), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Situation Awareness Rating Technique (SART), Questionnaire for User Interaction Satisfaction (QUIS), Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES), respectively. Finally, dashboard evaluation criteria, including usefulness, operability, learnability, ease of use, suitability for tasks, improvement of situational awareness, satisfaction, user interface, content, and system capabilities, were suggested.

Conclusion

General questionnaires that were not specifically designed for dashboard evaluation were mainly used in reviewed studies. The current study suggested specific criteria for measuring the usability of dashboards. When selecting the usability evaluation criteria for dashboards, it is important to pay attention to the evaluation objectives, dashboard features and capabilities, and context of use.

A Framework for Evaluating Dashboards in Healthcare

In the era of 'information overload', effective information provision is essential for enabling rapid response and critical decision making. In making sense of diverse information sources, dashboards have become an indispensable tool, providing fast, effective, adaptable, and personalized access to information for professionals and the general public alike. However, these objectives place heavy requirements on dashboards as information systems in usability and effective design. Understanding these issues is challenging given the absence of consistent and comprehensive approaches to dashboard evaluation. In this article we systematically review literature on dashboard implementation in healthcare, where dashboards have been employed widely, and where there is widespread interest for improving the current state of the art, and subsequently analyse approaches taken towards evaluation. We draw upon consolidated dashboard literature and our own observations to introduce a general definition of dashboards which is more relevant to current trends, together with seven evaluation scenarios - task performance, behaviour change, interaction workflow, perceived engagement, potential utility, algorithm performance and system implementation. These scenarios distinguish different evaluation purposes which we illustrate through measurements, example studies, and common challenges in evaluation study design. We provide a breakdown of each evaluation scenario, and highlight some of the more subtle questions. We demonstrate the use of the proposed framework by a design study guided by this framework. We conclude by comparing this framework with existing literature, outlining a number of active discussion points and a set of dashboard evaluation best practices for the academic, clinical and software development communities alike.

Web-Based Tool (FH Family Share) to Increase Uptake of Cascade Testing for Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Development and Evaluation

Background

Familial hypercholesterolemia, a prevalent genetic disorder, remains significantly underdiagnosed in the United States. Cascade testing, wherein individuals diagnosed with familial hypercholesterolemia— probands—contact their family members to inform them of their risk for familial hypercholesterolemia, has low uptake in the United States. Digital tools are needed to facilitate communication between familial hypercholesterolemia probands and their family members and to promote sharing of familial hypercholesterolemia–related risk information.

Objective

We aimed to create and evaluate a web-based tool designed to enhance familial communication and promote cascade testing for familial hypercholesterolemia.

Methods

A hybrid type 1 implementation science framework and a user-centered design process were used to develop an interactive web-based tool—FH Family Share—that enables familial hypercholesterolemia probands to communicate information about their familial hypercholesterolemia diagnosis with at-risk relatives. Probands can also use the tool to draw a family pedigree and learn more about familial hypercholesterolemia through education modules and curated knowledge resources. Usability guidelines and standards were taken into account during the design and development of the tool. The initial prototype underwent a cognitive walkthrough, which was followed by usability testing with key stakeholders including genetic counselors and patients with familial hypercholesterolemia. Participants navigated the prototype using the think-aloud technique, and their feedback was used to refine features of the tool.

Results

Key themes that emerged from the cognitive walkthrough were design, format, navigation, terminology, instructions, and learnability. Expert feedback from the cognitive walkthrough resulted in a rebuild of the web-based tool to align it with institutional standards. Usability testing with genetic counselors and patients with familial hypercholesterolemia provided insights on user experience, satisfaction and interface design and highlighted specific modifications that were made to refine the features of FH Family Share. Genetic counselors and patients with familial hypercholesterolemia suggested inclusion of the following features in the web-based tool: (1) a letter-to-family-member email template, (2) education modules, and (3) knowledge resources. Surveys revealed that 6 of 9 (67%) genetic counselors found information within FH Family Share very easy to find, and 5 of 9 (56%) genetic counselors found information very easy to understand; 5 of 9 (56%) patients found information very easy to find within the website, and 7 of 9 (78%) patients found information very easy to understand. All genetic counselors and patients indicated that FH Family Share was a resource worth returning to.

Conclusions

FH Family Share facilitates communication between probands and their relatives. Once informed, at-risk family members have the option to seek testing and treatment for familial hypercholesterolemia.

Conceptual Ambiguity Surrounding Gamification and Serious Games in Health Care: Literature Review and Development of Game-Based Intervention Reporting Guidelines (GAMING)

BACKGROUND

In health care, the use of game-based interventions to increase motivation, engagement, and overall sustainability of health behaviors is steadily becoming more common. The most prevalent types of game-based interventions in health care research are gamification and serious games. Various researchers have discussed substantial conceptual differences between these 2 concepts, supported by empirical studies showing differences in the effects on specific health behaviors. However, researchers also frequently report cases in which terms related to these 2 concepts are used ambiguously or even interchangeably. It remains unclear to what extent existing health care research explicitly distinguishes between gamification and serious games and whether it draws on existing conceptual considerations to do so.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to address this lack of knowledge by capturing the current state of conceptualizations of gamification and serious games in health care research. Furthermore, we aim to provide tools for researchers to disambiguate the reporting of game-based interventions.

METHODS

We used a 2-step research approach. First, we conducted a systematic literature review of 206 studies, published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research and its sister journals, containing terms related to gamification, serious games, or both. We analyzed their conceptualizations of gamification and serious games, as well as the distinctions between the two concepts. Second, based on the literature review findings, we developed a set of guidelines for researchers reporting on game-based interventions and evaluated them with a group of 9 experts from the field.

RESULTS

Our results show that less than half of the concept mentions are accompanied by an explicit definition. To distinguish between the 2 concepts, we identified four common approaches: implicit distinction, synonymous use of terms, serious games as a type of gamified system, and distinction based on the full game dimension. Our Game-Based Intervention Reporting Guidelines (GAMING) consist of 25 items grouped into four topics: conceptual focus, contribution, mindfulness about related concepts, and individual concept definitions.

CONCLUSIONS

Conceptualizations of gamification and serious games in health care literature are strongly heterogeneous, leading to conceptual ambiguity. Following the GAMING can support authors in rigorous reporting on study results of game-based interventions.

Developing an Asthma Self-management Intervention Through a Web-Based Design Workshop for People With Limited Health Literacy: User-Centered Design Approach

Background

Technology, including mobile apps, has the potential to support self-management of long-term conditions and can be tailored to enhance adoption. We developed an app to support asthma self-management among people with limited health literacy in a web-based workshop (to ensure physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic).

Objective

The aim of this study is to develop and test a prototype asthma self-management mobile app tailored to the needs of people with limited health literacy through a web-based workshop.

Methods

We recruited participants from a primary care center in Malaysia. We adapted a design sprint methodology to a web-based workshop in five stages over 1 week. Patients with asthma and limited health literacy provided insights into real-life self-management issues in stage 1, which informed mobile app development in stages 2-4. We recruited additional patients to test the prototype in stage 5 using a qualitative research design. Participants gave feedback through a concurrent thinking-aloud process moderated by a researcher. Each interview lasted approximately 1 hour. Screen recordings of app browsing activities were performed. Interviews were audio-recorded and analyzed using a thematic approach to identify utility and usability issues.

Results

The stakeholder discussion identified four themes: individual, family, friends, and society and system levels. Five patients tested the prototype. Participants described 4 ways in which the app influenced or supported self-management (utility): offering information, providing access to an asthma action plan, motivating control of asthma through support for medication adherence, and supporting behavior change through a reward system. Specific usability issues addressed navigation, comprehension, and layout.

Conclusions

This study proved that it was possible to adapt the design sprint workshop to a web-based format with the added advantage that it allowed the development and the testing process to be done efficiently through various programs. The resultant app incorporated advice from stakeholders, including sources for information about asthma, medication and appointment reminders, accessible asthma action plans, and sources for social support. The app is now ready to move to feasibility testing.

Using the Design Sprint process to enhance and accelerate behavioral medicine progress: a case study and guidance

While challenges in the translation of behavioral medicine knowledge from academic settings to real-world use are well documented, they could potentially be reduced through the use of the Design Sprint process, a roadmap that facilitates progression from an idea to a product in 5 days via agile design and user-centered design principles. The Design Sprint is well aligned with several priorities of and methods common in behavioral medicine, including obtaining end-user feedback and thinking about implementation during intervention development. The Design Sprint could be used by behavioral medicine researchers for the development of research tools, implementation strategies, and behavior change interventions. The process may encourage creative and focused thinking, speed product development, and facilitate early user input. However, translating the Design Sprint to behavioral medicine research may present challenges, such as difficulty getting buy-in from team members, inconsistencies between the Design Sprint timeline, the need to obtain institutional review board approval for user testing, and the lack of traditional research processes (e.g., incorporating scientific research into intervention design). Several solutions and adaptations are possible to overcome these challenges while still maintaining the core features of the Design Sprint process. To demonstrate the use of the Design Sprint and potential adaptations, we present a case study of the development of a patient-facing digital tool for weight management and an accompanying implementation strategy. In conclusion, the Design Sprint offers behavioral medicine researchers an approach to developing new products with numerous potential benefits to researchers and to the individuals and communities we seek to impact.

Designing a reference architecture for health information systems

Background

Healthcare relies on health information systems (HISs) to support the care and receive reimbursement for the care provided. Healthcare providers experience many problems with their HISs due to improper architecture design. To support the design of a proper HIS architecture, a reference architecture (RA) can be used that meets the various stakeholder concerns of HISs. Therefore, the objective of this study is to develop and analyze an RA following well-established architecture design methods.

Methods

Domain analysis was performed to scope and model the domain of HISs. For the architecture design, we applied the views and beyond approach and designed the RA’s views based on the stakeholders and features from the domain analysis. We evaluated the RA with a case study.

Results

We derived the following four architecture views for HISs: The context diagram, decomposition view, layered view, and deployment view. Each view shows the architecture of the HIS from a different angle, suitable for various stakeholders. Based on a Japanese hospital information system study, we applied the RA and derived the application architecture.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that the methods of the software architecture design community could be used in the healthcare domain effectively and showed the applicability of the RA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01570-2.

The My Diabetes Care Patient Portal Intervention: Usability and Pre-Post Assessment

BACKGROUND

My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a novel, multifaceted patient portal intervention designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-management. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients' diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, and provides literacy level-appropriate educational resources.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the usability, acceptability, perceptions, and potential impact of MDC.

METHODS

We recruited 69 participants from four clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants were given 1 month of access to MDC and completed pre- and post-questionnaires including validated measures of usability and patient activation, and questions about user experience.

RESULTS

Sixty participants completed the study. Participants' mean age was 58, 55% were females, 68% were Caucasians, and 48% had limited health literacy (HL). Most participants (80%) visited MDC three or more times and 50% spent a total of ≥15 minutes on MDC. Participants' median System Usability Scale (SUS) score was 78.8 [Q1, Q3: 72.5, 87.5] and significantly greater than the threshold value of 68 indicative of "above average" usability (p < 0.001). The median SUS score of patients with limited HL was similar to those with adequate HL (77.5 [72.5, 85.0] vs. 82.5 [72.5, 92.5]; p = 0.41). Participants most commonly reported the literacy level-appropriate educational links and health data infographics as features that helped them better understand their diabetes health data (65%). All participants (100%) intended to continue to use MDC. Median Patient Activation Measure® scores increased postintervention (64.3 [55.6, 72.5] vs. 67.8 [60.6, 75.0]; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Participants, including those with limited HL, rated the usability of MDC above average, anticipated continued use, and identified key features that improved their understanding of diabetes health data. Patient activation improved over the study period. Our findings suggest MDC may be a beneficial addition to existing patient portals.

Evaluation of the My Diabetes Care Patient Portal Intervention: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a multi-faceted intervention embedded within an established patient portal, My Health at Vanderbilt. MDC is designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-care. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients’ diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, provides literacy-level appropriate educational resources, and links to a diabetes online patient support community and diabetes news feeds.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the effects of MDC on patient activation in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Moreover, we plan to assess secondary outcomes, including system use and usability, and the effects of MDC on cognitive and behavioral outcomes (eg, self-care and self-efficacy).

Methods

We are conducting a 6-month, 2-arm, parallel-design, pragmatic pilot randomized controlled trial of the effect of MDC on patient activation. Adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are recruited from primary care clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants are eligible for the study if they are currently being treated with at least one diabetes medication, are able to speak and read in English, are 21 years or older, and have an existing My Health at Vanderbilt account and reliable access to a desktop or laptop computer with internet access. We exclude patients living in long-term care facilities, patients with known cognitive deficits or severe visual impairment, and patients currently participating in any other diabetes-related research study. Participants are randomly assigned to MDC or usual care. We collect self-reported survey data, including the Patient Activation Measure (R) at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. We will use mixed-effects regression models to estimate potentially time-varying intervention effects while adjusting for the baseline measure of the outcome. The mixed-effects model will use fixed effects for patient-level characteristics and random effects for health care provider variables (eg, primary care physicians).

Results

This study is ongoing. Recruitment was closed in May 2020; 270 patients were randomized. Of those randomized, most (214/267, 80.1%) were non-Hispanic White, and 13.1% (35/267) were non-Hispanic Black, 43.7% (118/270) reported being 65 years or older, and 33.6% (90/268) reported limited health literacy. We obtained at least 95.6% (258/270) completion among participants through the 3-month follow-up assessment.

Conclusions

This randomized controlled trial will be one of the first to evaluate a patient-facing diabetes digital health intervention delivered via a patient portal. By embedding MDC into Epic’s MyChart platform with more than 127 million patient records, our intervention is directly integrated into routine care, highly scalable, and sustainable. Our findings and evolving patient portal functionality will inform the continued development of MDC to best meet users’ needs and a larger trial focused on the impact of MDC on clinical end points.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03947333; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03947333

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/25955

Perceptions of Using Multiple Mobile Health Devices to Support Self-Management Among Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

PURPOSE

This study identified facilitators and barriers pertaining to the use of multiple mobile health (mHealth) devices (Fitbit Alta® fitness tracker, iHealth® glucometer, BodyTrace® scale) that support self-management behaviors in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

DESIGN

This qualitative descriptive study presents study participants' perceptions of using multiple mobile devices to support T2DM self-management. Additionally, this study assessed whether participants found visualizations, generated from each participant's health data as obtained from the three separate devices, useful and easy to interpret.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were completed with a convenience sample of participants (n = 20) from a larger randomized control trial on T2DM self-management. Interview questions focused on participants' use of three devices to support T2DM self-management. A study team member created data visualizations of each interview participant's health data using RStudio.

RESULTS

We identified two themes from descriptions of study participants: feasibility and usability. We identified one theme about visualizations created from data obtained from the mobile devices. Despite some challenges, individuals with T2DM found it feasible to use multiple mobile devices to facilitate engagement in T2DM self-management behaviors.

DISCUSSION

As mHealth devices become increasingly popular for diabetes self-management and are integrated into care delivery, we must address issues associated with the use of multiple mHealth devices and the use of aggregate data to support T2DM self-management.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Real-time patient-generated health data that are easily accessible and readily available can assist T2DM self-management and catalyze conversations, leading to better self-management. Our findings lay an important groundwork for understanding how individuals with T2DM can use multiple mHealth devices simultaneously to support self-management.

Patient Challenges and Needs in Comprehending Laboratory Test Results: Mixed Methods Study

Background

Patients are increasingly able to access their laboratory test results via patient portals. However, merely providing access does not guarantee comprehension. Patients could experience confusion when reviewing their test results.

Objective

The aim of this study is to examine the challenges and needs of patients when comprehending laboratory test results.

Methods

We conducted a web-based survey with 203 participants and a set of semistructured interviews with 13 participants. We assessed patients’ perceived challenges and needs (both informational and technological needs) when they attempted to comprehend test results, factors associated with patients’ perceptions, and strategies for improving the design of patient portals to communicate laboratory test results more effectively. Descriptive and correlation analysis and thematic analysis were used to analyze the survey and interview data, respectively.

Results

Patients face a variety of challenges and confusion when reviewing laboratory test results. To better comprehend laboratory results, patients need different types of information, which are grouped into 2 categories—generic information (eg, reference range) and personalized or contextual information (eg, treatment options, prognosis, what to do or ask next). We also found that several intrinsic factors (eg, laboratory result normality, health literacy, and technology proficiency) significantly impact people’s perceptions of using portals to view and interpret laboratory results. The desired enhancements of patient portals include providing timely explanations and educational resources (eg, a health encyclopedia), increasing usability and accessibility, and incorporating artificial intelligence–based technology to provide personalized recommendations.

Conclusions

Patients face significant challenges in interpreting the meaning of laboratory test results. Designers and developers of patient portals should employ user-centered approaches to improve the design of patient portals to present information in a more meaningful way.

Atrial fibrillation dashboard evaluation using the think aloud protocol

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common cardiac arrhythmia which is a major risk factor for stroke, transient ischaemic attacks and increased mortality. Primary care management of AF can significantly reduce these risks. We carried out an evaluation to asses the usability of an AF dashboard developed to improve data quality and the quality of care.

METHOD

We developed an online dashboard about the quality of AF management for general practices of the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre network. The dashboard displays (1) case ascertainment, (2) a calculation of stroke and haemorrhage risk to assess whether the benefits of anticogulants outweigh their risk, (3) prescriptions of different types of anticoagulant and (4) if prescribed anticoagulant is at the correct dose. We conducted the think aloud evaluation, involving 24 dashboard users to improve its usability.

RESULTS

Analysis of 24 transcripts received produced 120 individual feedback items (ie, verbalised tasks) that were mapped across five usability problem classes. We enhanced the dashboard based on evaluation feedback to encourage adoption by general practices participating in the sentinel network.

CONCLUSIONS

The think aloud evaluation provided useful insights into important usability issues that require further development. Our enhanced AF dashboard was acceptable to clinicians and its impact on data quality and care should be assessed in a formal study.

Patient Portal Barriers and Group Differences: Cross-Sectional National Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Past studies examining barriers to patient portal adoption have been conducted with a small number of patients and health care settings, limiting generalizability.

OBJECTIVE

This study had the following two objectives: (1) to assess the prevalence of barriers to patient portal adoption among nonadopters and (2) to examine the association between nonadopter characteristics and reported barriers in a nationally representative sample.

METHODS

Data from this study were obtained from the 2019 Health Information National Trends Survey. We calculated descriptive statistics to determine the most prevalent barriers and conducted multiple variable logistic regression analysis to examine which characteristics were associated with the reported barriers.

RESULTS

The sample included 4815 individuals. Among these, 2828 individuals (58.73%) had not adopted a patient portal. Among the nonadopters (n=2828), the most prevalent barriers were patient preference for in-person communication (1810/2828, 64.00%), no perceived need for the patient portal (1385/2828, 48.97%), and lack of comfort and experience with computers (735/2828, 25.99%). Less commonly, individuals reported having no patient portal (650/2828, 22.98%), no internet access (650/2828, 22.98%), privacy concerns (594/2828, 21.00%), difficulty logging on (537/2828, 18.99%), and multiple patient portals (255/2828, 9.02%) as barriers. Men had significantly lower odds of indicating a preference for speaking directly to a provider compared with women (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.94; P=.01). Older age (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02; P<.001), having a chronic condition (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.44-2.33; P<.001), and having an income lower than US $20,000 (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.11-2.34; P=.01) were positively associated with indicating a preference for speaking directly to a provider. Hispanic individuals had significantly higher odds of indicating that they had no need for a patient portal (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.24-2.05; P<.001) compared with non-Hispanic individuals. Older individuals (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.06; P<.001), individuals with less than a high school diploma (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.79-5.53; P<.001), and individuals with a household income of less than US $20,000 (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.88-4.11; P<.001) had significantly higher odds of indicating that they were uncomfortable with a computer.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common barriers to patient portal adoption are preference for in-person communication, not having a need for the patient portal, and feeling uncomfortable with computers, which are barriers that are modifiable and can be intervened upon. Patient characteristics can help predict which patients are most likely to experience certain barriers to patient portal adoption. Further research is needed to tailor implementation approaches based on patients' needs and preferences.

Using Electronic Health Record Portals to Improve Patient Engagement: Research Priorities and Best Practices

Ninety percent of health care systems now offer patient portals to access electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States, but only 15% to 30% of patients use these platforms. Using PubMed, the authors identified 53 studies published from September 2013 to June 2019 that informed best practices and priorities for future research on patient engagement with EHR data through patient portals, These studies mostly involved outpatient settings and fell into 3 major categories: interventions to increase use of patient portals, usability testing of portal interfaces, and documentation of patient and clinician barriers to portal use. Interventions that used one-on-one patient training were associated with the highest portal use. Patients with limited health or digital literacy faced challenges to portal use. Clinicians reported a lack of workflows to support patient use of portals in routine practice. These studies suggest that achieving higher rates of patient engagement through EHR portals will require paying more attention to the needs of diverse patients and systematically measuring usability as well as scope of content. Future work should incorporate implementation science approaches and directly address the key role of clinicians and staff in promoting portal use.

A Systematic Review of Patient-Facing Visualizations of Personal Health Data

OBJECTIVES

As personal health data are being returned to patients with increasing frequency and volume, visualizations are garnering excitement for their potential to facilitate patient interpretation. Evaluating these visualizations is important to ensure that patients are able to understand and, when appropriate, act upon health data in a safe and effective manner. The objective of this systematic review was to review and evaluate the state of the science of patient-facing visualizations of personal health data.

METHODS

We searched five scholarly databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ACM Digital Library [Association for Computing Machinery Digital Library], and IEEE Computational Index [Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Computational Index]) through December 1, 2018 for relevant articles. We included English-language articles that developed or tested one or more patient-facing visualizations for personal health data. Three reviewers independently assessed quality of included articles using the Mixed methods Appraisal Tool. Characteristics of included articles and visualizations were extracted and synthesized.

RESULTS

In 39 articles included in the review, there was heterogeneity in the sample sizes and methods for evaluation but not sample demographics. Few articles measured health literacy, numeracy, or graph literacy. Line graphs were the most common visualization, especially for longitudinal data, but number lines were used more frequently in included articles over past 5 years. Article findings suggested more patients understand the number lines and bar graphs compared with line graphs, and that color is effective at communicating risk, improving comprehension, and increasing confidence in interpretation.

CONCLUSION

In this review, we summarize types and components of patient-facing visualizations and methodologies for development and evaluation in the reviewed articles. We also identify recommendations for future work relating to collecting and reporting data, examining clinically actionable boundaries for diverse data types, and leveraging data science. This work will be critically important as patient access of their personal health data through portals and mobile devices continues to rise.

Human Factors and Usability for Health Information Technology: Old and New Challenges

OBJECTIVES

Despite national mandates, incentives, and other programs, the design of health information technology (IT) remains problematic and usability problems continue to be reported. This paper reviews recent literature on human factors and usability of health IT, with a specific focus on research aimed at applying human factors methods and principles to improve the actual design of health IT, its use, and associated patient and clinician outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed recent literature on human factors and usability problems of health IT and research on human-centered design of health IT for clinicians and patients.

RESULTS

Studies continue to show usability problems of health IT experienced by multiple groups of health care professionals (e.g., physicians and nurses) as well as patients. Recent research shows that usability is influenced by both designers (e.g., IT vendors) and implementers in health care organizations, and that the application of human-centered design practices needs to be further improved and extended. We welcome emerging research on the design of health IT for teams as team-based care is increasingly implemented throughout health care.

CONCLUSIONS

Progress in the application of human factors methods and principles to the design of health IT is occurring, with important information provided on their actual impact on care processes and patient outcomes. Future research should examine the work of health IT designers and implementers, which would help to develop strategies for further embedding human factors engineering in IT design processes.