Lyles Courtney R, Sarkar Urmimala, Osborn Chandra Y
UCSF Center for Vulnerable Populations at San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA, USA,
Curr Diab Rep. 2014 Oct;14(10):534. doi: 10.1007/s11892-014-0534-9.
Consumer health technologies can educate patients about diabetes and support their self-management, yet usability evidence is rarely published even though it determines patient engagement, optimal benefit of any intervention, and an understanding of generalizability. Therefore, we conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed articles published from 2009 to 2013 that tested the usability of a web- or mobile-delivered system/application designed to educate and support patients with diabetes. Overall, the 23 papers included in our review used mixed (n = 11), descriptive quantitative (n = 9), and qualitative methods (n = 3) to assess usability, such as documenting which features performed as intended and how patients rated their experiences. More sophisticated usability evaluations combined several complementary approaches to elucidate more aspects of functionality. Future work pertaining to the design and evaluation of technology-delivered diabetes education/support interventions should aim to standardize the usability testing processes and publish usability findings to inform interpretation of why an intervention succeeded or failed and for whom.
消费者健康技术可以对糖尿病患者进行教育,并支持他们的自我管理,然而,尽管可用性证据决定了患者的参与度、任何干预措施的最佳效益以及对普遍性的理解,但此类证据却很少发表。因此,我们对2009年至2013年发表的同行评议文章进行了叙述性综述,这些文章测试了旨在教育和支持糖尿病患者的基于网络或移动设备的系统/应用程序的可用性。总体而言,我们综述中纳入的23篇论文使用了混合方法(n = 11)、描述性定量方法(n = 9)和定性方法(n = 3)来评估可用性,例如记录哪些功能按预期运行以及患者对其体验的评价。更复杂的可用性评估结合了几种互补方法,以阐明功能的更多方面。未来与技术提供的糖尿病教育/支持干预措施的设计和评估相关的工作应旨在规范可用性测试流程,并发表可用性研究结果,以便解释干预措施成功或失败的原因以及适用于哪些人群。