17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 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

      Use of the FallAkte Plus System as an IT Infrastructure for the North Rhine-Westphalian General Practice Research Network: Mixed Methods Usability Study

      research-article
      , PhD 1 , , , MSc 1 , , Dr med, MPH 1 , , PA 1 , , MPH, Prof Dr Med 2 , , Dr rer nat 2 , , Dr med 2 , , PA 2 , , Prof Dr 3 , , Dr med 3 , , MA 3 , , Prof Dr 4 , , MSc 4 , , Dr rer med 4 , , MSc 3 , , MSc 5 , , MSc 6 , , Dr rer soc oec 6 , , MA 7 , , Prof Dr Med 7 , , PhD 1 , , MPH, Prof Dr Med 1
      (Reviewer), (Reviewer)
      JMIR Formative Research
      JMIR Publications
      primary care, general practice research network, physicians, feasibility study, IT infrastructure, usability, FallAkte, FallAkte Plus system, mixed methods usability study, North Rhine-Westphalian general practice research network, NRW-GPRN, Germany, German, universities, survey, questionnaire, participants

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Primary care research networks can generate important information in the setting where most patients are seen and treated. However, this requires a suitable IT infrastructure (ITI), which the North Rhine-Westphalian general practice research network is looking to implement.

          Objective

          This mixed methods research study aims to evaluate (study 1) requirements for an ITI and (study 2) the usability of an IT solution already available on the market, the FallAkte Plus (FA+) system for the North Rhine-Westphalian general practice research network, which comprises 8 primary care university institutes in Germany’s largest state.

          Methods

          In study 1, a survey was conducted among researchers from the institutes to identify the requirements for a suitable ITI. The questionnaire consisted of standardized questions with open-ended responses. In study 2, a mixed method approach combining a think-aloud approach and a quantitative survey was used to evaluate the usability and acceptance of the FA+ system among 3 user groups: researchers, general practitioners, and practice assistants. Respondents were asked to assess the usability with the validated system usability scale and to test a short questionnaire on vaccination management through FA+.

          Results

          In study 1, five of 8 institutes participated in the requirements survey. A total of 32 user requirements related primarily to study management were identified, including data entry, data storage, and user access management. In study 2, a total of 36 participants (24 researchers and 12 general practitioners or practice assistants) were surveyed in the mixed methods study of an already existing IT solution. The tutorial video and handouts explaining how to use the FA+ system were well received. Researchers, unlike practice personnel, were concerned about data security and data protection regarding the system’s emergency feature, which enables access to all patient data. The median overall system usability scale rating was 60 (IQR 33.0-85.0), whereby practice personnel (median 82, IQR 58.0-94.0) assigned higher ratings than researchers (median 44, IQR 14.0-61.5). Users appreciated the option to integrate data from practices and other health care facilities. However, they voted against the use of the FA+ system due to a lack of support for various study formats.

          Conclusions

          Usability assessments vary markedly by professional group and role. In its current stage of development, the FA+ system does not fully meet the requirements for a suitable ITI. Improvements in the user interface, performance, interoperability, security, and advanced features are necessary to make it more effective and user-friendly. Collaborating with end users and incorporating their feedback are crucial for the successful development of any practice network research ITI.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

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

          Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

          Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future

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

              Methods of Usability Testing in the Development of eHealth Applications: A Scoping Review

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Form Res
                JMIR Form Res
                JFR
                JMIR Formative Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2561-326X
                2024
                20 May 2024
                : 8
                : e53206
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine University Hospital Bonn University of Bonn Bonn Germany
                [2 ] Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine Faculty of Medicine Ruhr University Bochum Bochum Germany
                [3 ] Institute of General Practice/Family Medicine Medical Faculty University of Duisburg-Essen Essen Germany
                [4 ] Institute of General Practice Faculty of Medicine University Hospital of Cologne Cologne Germany
                [5 ] Institute of General Medicine Faculty of Medicine University of Münster Münster Germany
                [6 ] Institute for Digitalization and General Medicine University Hospital Aachen Aachen Germany
                [7 ] Institute of General Practice and Primary Care Faculty of Health Witten/Herdecke University Witten Germany
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Arezoo Bozorgmehr arezoo.bozorgmehr@ 123456ukbonn.de
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3020-1332
                https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9855-5085
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9410-1766
                https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8091-2379
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0117-7188
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1335-2366
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6419-0945
                https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6405-1435
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6538-0241
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1562-7178
                https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2762-9657
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6745-1047
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6410-1642
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9216-3568
                https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4420-3795
                https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3186-6341
                https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3404-3112
                https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9791-3920
                https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4197-6718
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9901-1727
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0143-0873
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1285-1545
                Article
                v8i1e53206
                10.2196/53206
                11148515
                38767942
                b3415879-208b-449f-89ed-8ec0fe65af3c
                ©Arezoo Bozorgmehr, Simon-Konstantin Thiem, Dorothea Wild, Melanie Reinsdorff, Horst Christian Vollmar, Annika Kappernagel, Kathrin Schloessler, Sabine Weissbach, Michael Pentzek, Dorothea Dehnen, Julia Drexler, Beate Sigrid Mueller, Larisa Pilic, Lion Lehmann, Susanne Loescher, Elena Darinka Hohmann, Friederike Frank, Gülay Ates, Susanne Kersten, Achim Mortsiefer, Benjamin Aretz, Birgitta Weltermann. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 20.05.2024.

                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 JMIR Formative Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://formative.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 4 October 2023
                : 2 December 2023
                : 29 December 2023
                : 19 January 2024
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                primary care,general practice research network,physicians,feasibility study,it infrastructure,usability,fallakte,fallakte plus system,mixed methods usability study,north rhine-westphalian general practice research network,nrw-gprn,germany,german,universities,survey,questionnaire,participants

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content184

                Most referenced authors422