Measuring User Acceptance of Wearable Symbiotic Devices: Validation Study Across Application Scenarios

User preferences need to be taken into account in order to be able to design devices that will gain acceptance both in a clinical and home setting. Sensor systems become redundant if patients or clinicians do not want to work with them. The aim of this systematic review was to determine both patients' and clinicians' preferences for non-invasive body-worn sensor systems. A search for relevant articles and conference proceedings was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents Connect, and EEEI explore. In total 843 papers were identified of which only 11 studies were deemed suitable for inclusion. A range of different clinically relevant user groups were included. The key user preferences were that a body-worn sensor system should be compact, embedded and simple to operate and maintain. It also should not affect daily behavior nor seek to directly replace a health care professional. It became apparent that despite the importance of user preferences, they are rarely considered and as such there is a lack of high-quality studies in this area. We therefore would like to encourage researchers to focus on the implications of user preferences when designing wearable sensor systems.

To determine how patients and physicians balance the perceived benefits and harms of sharing electronic health data for patient care and for secondary purposes. Before-after survey of patients and providers in practices using electronic medical records (EMRs) enrolled in a clinical trial in Ontario, Canada. Outcomes were measured using the Health Information Privacy Questionnaire (HIPQ) at baseline and end of study. Thirteen questions in 4 general domains investigated attitudes towards the privacy of EMRs, outsider's use of patient's health information, the sharing of patient's information within the health care system, and the overall perception of benefits versus harms of computerization in health care. 511 patients (mean age 60.3 years, 49.6% female) and 46 physicians (mean age 47.2 years, 37.0% female) participated. Most (>90%) supported the computerized sharing of the patient's health records among their health care professionals and to provide clinical advice. Fewer agreed that the patient's de-identified information should be shared outside of the health care circle (<70%). Only a minority of either group supported the notion that computerized records can be keep more private than paper records (38-50%). Overall, a majority (58% patients, 70% physicians) believed that the benefits of computerization were greater than the risks of confidentiality loss. This was especially true for patients who were frequent computer users. While these primary care physicians and their patients valued the clinical features of EMRs, a substantial minority have concerns about the secondary use of de-identified information. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.