Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Stroke | Research article

How to improve eRehabilitation programs in stroke care? A focus group study to identify requirements of end-users

Authors: Manon Wentink, L. van Bodegom-Vos, B. Brouns, H. Arwert, S. Houdijk, P. Kewalbansing, L. Boyce, T. Vliet Vlieland, A. de Kloet, J. Meesters

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

A user-centered design approach for eHealth interventions improves their effectiveness in stroke rehabilitation. Nevertheless, insight into requirements of end-users (patients/informal caregivers and/or health professionals) for eRehabilitation is lacking. The aim of this study was to identify end-user requirements for a comprehensive eHealth program in stroke rehabilitation.

Methods

Eight focus groups were conducted to identify user requirements; six with patients/informal caregivers and two with health professionals involved in stroke rehabilitation (rehabilitation physicians, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, team coordinators, speech therapist). The focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed in full. Direct content analysis was used to identify the end-user requirements for stroke eHealth interventions concerning three categories: accessibility, usability and content.

Results

In total, 45 requirements for the accessibility, usability and content of a stroke eRehabilitation program emerged from the focus groups. Most requirements concerned content (27 requirements), followed by usability (12 requirements) and accessibility (6 requirements). Patients/informal caregivers and health professionals each identified 37 requirements, respectively, with 29 of them overlapping.

Conclusions

Requirements between stroke patients/informal caregivers and health professionals differed on several aspects. Therefore, involving the perspectives of all end users in the design process of stroke eRehabilitation programs is needed to achieve a user-centered design.

Trial registration

The study was approved by the Medical Ethical Review Board of the Leiden University Medical Center [P15.281].
Literature
1.
Feigin VL, Forouzanfar MH, Krishnamurthi R, Mensah GA, Connor M, Bennett DA, et al. Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990–2010: findings from the global burden of disease study 2010. Lancet. 2014;383(9913):245–55.CrossRef
2.
Martin C, Dellatolas G, Viguier D, Willadino-Braga L, Deloche G. Subjective experience after stroke. Appl Neuropsychol. 2002;9:148–58.CrossRef
3.
Wilkinson PR, Wolfe CDA, Warburton FG, Rudd AG, Howard RS, Roos-Russell RW, Beech RR. A long-term follow-up of stroke patients. Stroke. 1997;28:507–12.CrossRef
4.
Clark B, Whitall J, Kwakkel G, Mehrholz J, Ewings S, Burridge J. Time spent in rehabilitation and effect on measures of activity after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;(3).
5.
Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR. Cramer SC, et al guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery. Stroke. 2016;47(6):e98–e169.CrossRef
6.
7.
Bashshur RL, Shannon G, Krupinski EA, Grigsby J. Sustaining and realizing the promise of telemedicine. Telemed E Health. 2013;19(5):339–45.CrossRef
8.
Teasell RW, Foley NC, Bhogal SK, Speechley MR. An evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2015.
9.
Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation: an abridged version of a Cochrane review. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015;51(4):497–506.PubMed
10.
Rubin MN, Wellik KE, Channer DD, Demaerschalk BM. Systematic review of telestroke for post-stroke care and rehabilitation. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2013;15(8):1–7.CrossRef
11.
Saposnik G, Levin M. & stroke outcome research Canada (SORCan) working group. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation a meta-analysis and implications for health professionals. Stroke. 2011;42(5):1380–6.CrossRef
12.
De Mauro A. Virtual reality based rehabilitation and game technology. EICS4 Med. 2011;1:48–52.
13.
Webster D, Celik O. Systematic review of Kinect applications in elderly care and stroke rehabilitation. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014;11(1):108.CrossRef
14.
Schwamm LH, Chumbler N, Brown E, Fonarow GC, Berube D, Nystrom K, et al. Recommendations for the implementation of telehealth in cardiovascular and stroke care: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016.
15.
Arnrich B, Mayora O, Bardram J, Tröster G. Pervasive healthcare: paving the way for a pervasive, user-centered and preventive healthcare model. Methods Inf Med. 2010;49(1):67–73.CrossRef
16.
Holtzblatt K, Wendell JB, Wood S. Introduction in rapid contextual design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 2005.
17.
Sivan M, Gallagher J, Holt R, Weightman A, Levesley M, Bhakta B. Investigating the international classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF) framework to capture user needs in the concept stage of rehabilitation technology development. Assist Technol. 2014;26(3):164–73.CrossRef
18.
van Gemert-Pijnen JE, Nijland N, van Limburg M, Ossebaard HC, Kelders SM, Eysenbach G, et al. A holistic framework to improve the uptake and impact of eHealth technologies. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4).
19.
Eslami M, Firoozabadi M, Homayounvala E. User preferences for adaptive user interfaces in health information systems. Universal Access Inf Soc. 2018;17(4):875-83.CrossRef
20.
Schnall R, Rojas M, Bakken S, Brown W, Carballo-Dieguez A, Carry M, Travers J. A user-centered model for designing consumer mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps). J Biomed Inf. 2016;60:243-51.CrossRef
21.
Kushniruk A. Evaluation in the design of health information systems: application of approaches emerging from usability engineering. Comput Biol Med. 2002;32(3):141–9.CrossRef
22.
Fouladinejad F, Roberts JR. A computer aided learning package for training users and maintainers of medical equipment. In: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, “Bridging Disciplines for Biomedicine,”. Amsterdam; 1996.
23.
Shah SG, Robinson I. User involvement in healthcare technology development and assessment: structured literature review. Int J Health Care Qual Assur Inc Leadersh Health Serv. 2006;19:500–15.CrossRef
24.
Shah SG, Robinson I, AlShawi S. Developing medical device technologies from users’ perspectives: a theoretical framework for involving users in the development process. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:514–21.CrossRef
25.
Nasr N, Leon B, Mountain G, Nijenhuis SM, Prange G, Sale P, et al. The experience of living with stroke and using technology: opportunities to engage and co-design with end users. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2016;11(8):653–60.PubMed
26.
Ehn M, Hansson P, Sjölinder M, Boman IL, Folke M, Sommerfeld D, et al. Users perspectives on interactive distance technology enabling home-based motor training for stroke patients. pHealth. 2015;5:145–52.
27.
Mawson S, Nasr N, Parker J, Zheng H, Davies R, Mountain G. Developing a personalised self-management system for post stroke rehabilitation; utilising a user-centred design methodology. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9(6):521–8.CrossRef
28.
Parker J, Mawson S, Mountain G, Nasr N, Davies R & Zheng H. The provision of feedback through computer-based technology to promote self-managed post-stroke rehabilitation in the home, Disabil Rehabil Assist Techn 2014.
29.
Lu EC, Wang R, Huq R, Gardner D, Karam P, Zabjek K, et al. Development of a robotic device for upper limb stroke rehabilitation: a user-centered design approach. Paladyn J Behav Robot. 2011;2(4):176–84.
30.
Lange B, Flynn S, Proffitt R, Chang CY, Rizzo A. Development of an interactive game-based rehabilitation tool for dynamic balance training. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2010;17(5):345–52.CrossRef
31.
Zheng H, Davies R, Zhou H, Hammerton J, Mawson SJ, Ware PM, et al. SMART project: application of emerging information and communication technology to home-based rehabilitation for stroke patients. Int J Disabil Hum Dev. 2006;5(3):271.CrossRef
32.
Mountain G, Ware P, Hammerton J, Mawson S, Zheng H, Davies R, et al. The SMART project: a user led approach to developing applications for domiciliary stroke rehabilitation. Des Accessible Technol. 2006;6:135–44.
33.
Miñón R, Moreno L, Martínez P, Abascal J. An approach to the integration of accessibility requirements into a user interface development method. Sci Comput Program. 2014;86:58–73.CrossRef
34.
Kim Y, Crowston K. Technology adoption and use theory review for studying scientists' continued use of cyber-infrastructure. Proc Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2011;48(1):1–10.
35.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9241-210 Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210. Human-centred design for interactive systems. 2010.
36.
Pagliari C. Design and evaluation in eHealth: challenges and implications for an interdisciplinary field. J Med Internet Res. 2007;9(2):e15.CrossRef
37.
Hebert M. Telehealth success: evaluation framework development. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2001;84(Pt 2):1145–9.PubMed
38.
Koch S. Improving quality of life through eHealth–the patient perspective. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;6:25–9.
39.
Rinkus S, Walji M, Johnson-Throop KA, Malin JT, Turley JP, Smith JW, Zhang J. Human-centered design of a distributed knowledge management system. J Biomed Inform. 2005;38(1):4–17.CrossRef
40.
Davoody N, Koch S, Krakau I, Hägglund M. Post-discharge stroke patients’ information needs as input to proposing patient-centred eHealth services. BMC Med Inform Decis Making. 2016;16(1):66.CrossRef
41.
Kitzinger J. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ. 1995;311(7000):299.CrossRef
42.
Kitzinger J. Focus group research: using group dynamics to explore perceptions, experiences and understandings. In: Holloway I, editor. Qualitative research in health care. 1st ed. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2005. p. 56–70.
43.
Francis JJ, Johnston M, Robertson C, Glidewell L, Entwistle V, Eccles MP. What is an adequate sample size? 39 Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychol Health. 2010;25:1229–45.CrossRef
44.
Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, et al. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27:425–78.CrossRef
45.
Kazanjian A, Green CJ. Beyond effectiveness: the evaluation of information systems using a comprehensive health technology assessment framework. Comput Biol Med. 2002;32(3):165–77.CrossRef
46.
Hamid A, Sarmad A. Evaluation of e-health services: user's perspective criteria. Transforming Gov People Process Policy. 2008;2(4):243–55.
47.
Kaufman D, Roberts WD, Merrill J, Lai TY, Bakken S. Applying an evaluation framework for health information system design, development, and implementation. Nurs Res. 2006;55(2 Suppl):S37–42.CrossRef
48.
Eysenbach G. A framework for evaluating e-health: systematic review of studies assessing the quality of health information and services for patients on the Internet. J Med Internet Res. 2000;2(suppl2).CrossRef
49.
Eng TR, Gustafson DH, Henderson J, Jimison H, Patrick K. Introduction to evaluation of interactive health communication applications. Science panel on interactive communication and health. Am J Prev Med. 1999;16(1):10–5.CrossRef
50.
Esser P, Goossens R. A framework for the design of user-centered teleconsulting systems. J Telemed Telecare. 2009;15(1):32–9.CrossRef
51.
Gulliksen J, Göransson B, Boivie I, Blomkvist S, Persson J, Cajander Å. Key principles for user-centred systems design. Behav Inform Technol. 2003;22(6):397–409.CrossRef
52.
Oinas-Kukkonen H, Harjumaa M. Persuasive systems design: key issues, process model, and system features. Commun Assoc Inf Syst. 2009;24(1):28.
53.
Resnicow K, Strecher V, Couper M, Chua H, Little R, Nair V, et al. Methodologic and design issues in patient-centered e-health research. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38(1):98–102.CrossRef
54.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.CrossRef
55.
Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277–88.CrossRef
56.
Mountain G, Wilson S, Eccleston C, Mawson S, Hammerton J, Ware T, et al. Developing and testing a telerehabilitation system for people following stroke: issues of usability. J Eng Des. 2010;21(2–3):223–36.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
How to improve eRehabilitation programs in stroke care? A focus group study to identify requirements of end-users
Authors
Manon Wentink
L. van Bodegom-Vos
B. Brouns
H. Arwert
S. Houdijk
P. Kewalbansing
L. Boyce
T. Vliet Vlieland
A. de Kloet
J. Meesters
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Stroke
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0871-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research article

Assigning value to preparation for prostate cancer decision making: a willingness to pay analysis

Research article

Utilizing a user-centered approach to develop and assess pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for thiopurine methyltransferase

Research article

Does a Mobile app improve patients’ knowledge of stroke risk factors and health-related quality of life in patients with stroke? A randomized controlled trial

Research article

Building a tobacco user registry by extracting multiple smoking behaviors from clinical notes

Correction

Correction to: ThalPred: a web-based prediction tool for discriminating thalassemia trait and iron deficiency anemia

Research article

Using machine learning models to improve stroke risk level classification methods of China national stroke screening