7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Authors’ Response to Peer Reviews of “Continuous User Experience Monitoring of a Patient-Completed Preoperative Assessment System in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Study”

      author-comment
        , BSc, MD, MSc 1 , , , BEng, MSc, PhD 1
      JMIRx Med
      JMIR Publications

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references3

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Continuous User Experience Monitoring of a Patient-Completed Preoperative Assessment System in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Study

          Background Anesthetic preoperative assessment (POA) is now a common part of the surgical care pathway, and guidelines support its routine use. MyPreOp (Ultramed Ltd) is a web-based POA system that enables remote assessments. Usability is a key factor in the success of digital health solutions. Objective This study aims to assess the usability of the MyPreOp system through patient feedback, investigate the amount of time it took for patients to complete the POA questionnaire and the factors that influenced completion time, and explore the effect on completion times of implementing a validated eHealth usability scale, as compared to using a simple but unvalidated usability evaluation scale, and to test the feasibility of administering a more detailed usability evaluation scale in a staggered manner so as not to unduly increase completion times. Methods In this cross-sectional study, anonymized data sets were extracted from the MyPreOp system. The participants were adults (aged ≥18 years), scheduled for nonurgent surgical procedures performed in hospitals in the United Kingdom, who gave consent for their anonymized data to be analyzed. Data collected included age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical classification status, and completion time. Two user experience evaluations were used: in Phase 1, 2 questions asking about overall experience and ease of use, and in Phase 2, a previously validated usability questionnaire, with its 20 questions equally distributed among 5 succeeding patient cohorts. There were 2593 respondents in total (Phase 1: n=1193; Phase 2: n=1400). The median age of the participants was 46 years, and 1520 (58.62%) of the 2593 respondents were female. End points measured were the median completion times in Phase I and Phase II. The data were collected by extracting a subset of records from the database and exported to a spreadsheet for analysis (Excel, Microsoft Corporation). The data were analyzed for differences in completion times between Phase I and Phase II, as well as for differences between age groups, genders, and ASA classifications. Results MyPreOp scored well in usability in both phases. In Phase 1, 81.64% (974/1193) of respondents had a good or better experience, and 93.8% (1119/1193) found it easy to use. The usability rating in Phase 2 was 4.13 out of a maximum of 5, indicating high usability. The median completion time was 40.4 minutes. The implementation of the longer usability evaluation scale in Phase 2 did not negatively impact the completion times. Age and ASA physical status were found to be moderately associated with increased completion times. Conclusions MyPreOp rates high in both user experience and usability. The method of dividing the questionnaire into 5 blocks is valid and does not negatively affect completion times. Further research into the factors affecting completion time is recommended.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Peer Review of “Continuous User Experience Monitoring of a Patient-Completed Preoperative Assessment System in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Study”

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Peer Review of “Continuous User Experience Monitoring of a Patient-Completed Preoperative Assessment System in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Study”

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIRx Med
                JMIRx Med
                JMIRxMed
                JMIRx Med
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2563-6316
                Jan-Mar 2022
                6 January 2022
                : 3
                : 1
                : e35504
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Centre for Health Technology University of Plymouth Plymouth United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Inocencio Daniel Maramba inocencio.maramba@ 123456plymouth.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5464-6021
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9506-6007
                Article
                v3i1e35504
                10.2196/35504
                10414448
                244cce72-df60-4a8e-bd66-c65c2ef3ff66
                ©Inocencio Daniel Maramba, Arunangsu Chatterjee. Originally published in JMIRx Med (https://med.jmirx.org), 06.01.2022.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIRx Med, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://med.jmirx.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 7 December 2021
                : 7 December 2021
                Categories
                Authors’ Response to Peer Reviews
                Authors’ Response to Peer Reviews

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log