29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Usability evaluation of an eHealth intervention for family carers of individuals affected by psychosis: A mixed-method study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Background

          Existing research suggests that eHealth interventions targeting family carers of individuals with long-term illness offer a promising approach to care delivery. In particular, digital psychoeducational interventions with interactive psychosocial support are well-received with high rates of satisfaction and acceptability. However, development of such interventions for psychosis carers is lacking. We developed a multi-component eHealth intervention specifically for carers of individuals affected by psychosis, called COPe-support (Carers fOr People with Psychosis e-support).

          Objective

          Using mixed methods to evaluate usability, system heuristics and perceived acceptability, we conducted a usability study to establish the suitability of the intervention prototype for the target user group.

          Methods

          Twenty-three carers were recruited to the study and participated in a think-aloud test or a remote online trial of the intervention. Qualitative feedback, post-use System Usability Scale (SUS) scores, and real-world usage data collected from the tests were analysed. These were also supplemented with heuristic evaluation data provided by an independent eLearning technology expert.

          Results

          Participants evaluated the intervention content as useful and helpful, and indicated that the system had satisfactory usability with a mean SUS score of 73%, above the usability quality benchmark threshold. Study results identified some minor usability issues, which were corroborated with the eLearning expert’s heuristic evaluation findings. We used these results to refine the COPe-support intervention.

          Conclusions

          The usability study with end-users and service providers identified real-life usage and usability issues. The study results helped us refine COPe-support and its delivery strategy before its launch as part of a large-scale clinical trial.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Influence of family life on the course of schizophrenic disorders: a replication.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Clinical efficacy of computerised cognitive-behavioural therapy for anxiety and depression in primary care: randomised controlled trial.

            Preliminary results have demonstrated the clinical efficacy of computerised cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) in the treatment of anxiety and depression in primary care. To determine, in an expanded sample, the dependence of the efficacy of this therapy upon clinical and demographic variables. A sample of 274 patients with anxiety and/or depression were randomly allocated to receive, with or without medication, computerised CBT or treatment as usual, with follow-up assessment at 6 months. The computerised therapy improved depression, negative attributional style, work and social adjustment, without interaction with drug treatment, duration of preexisting illness or severity of existing illness. For anxiety and positive attributional style, treatment interacted with severity such that computerised therapy did better than usual treatment for more disturbed patients. Computerised therapy also led to greater satisfaction with treatment. Computer-delivered CBT is a widely applicable treatment for anxiety and/or depression in general practice.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Estimating the number of subjects needed for a thinking aloud test

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Digit Health
                Digit Health
                DHJ
                spdhj
                Digital Health
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                2055-2076
                28 August 2019
                Jan-Dec 2019
                : 5
                : 2055207619871148
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, UK
                [2 ]School of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, UK
                [3 ]Institute of Medical and Biomedical Education, St George’s, University of London, UK
                [4 ]Health Service & Population Research Department, King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, UK
                [5 ]Independent GP*Both of the authors are first joint authors on the published paper.
                Author notes
                [*]Jacqueline Sin, Population Health Research Institute, St George’s, University of London, Cranmer Terrace, London SW17 0RE. Email: Jasin@ 123456sgul.ac.uk Twitter: @COPe_support
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0590-7165
                Article
                10.1177_2055207619871148
                10.1177/2055207619871148
                6713967
                31489205
                a6395455-089a-4786-b05f-37ba1bdbdcbd
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 22 March 2019
                : 31 July 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Research Trainees Coordinating Centre, FundRef http://doi.org/10.13039/501100000659;
                Award ID: PDF-2015-08-035
                Categories
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2019

                family,carers/caregivers,psychosis,ehealth,usability evaluation,think-aloud test,heuristic evaluation,system usability scale

                Comments

                Comment on this article