RegulEm, an unified protocol based-app for the treatment of emotional disorders: a parallel mixed methods usability and quality study.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Laura Martínez-García, Alba Fadrique-Jiménez, Vanesa-Ferreres -Galán, Cristina Robert Flors, Jorge Osma
{"title":"RegulEm, an unified protocol based-app for the treatment of emotional disorders: a parallel mixed methods usability and quality study.","authors":"Laura Martínez-García, Alba Fadrique-Jiménez, Vanesa-Ferreres -Galán, Cristina Robert Flors, Jorge Osma","doi":"10.1186/s12911-024-02679-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interest in mental health smartphone applications has grown in recent years. Despite their effectiveness and advantages, special attention needs to be paid to two aspects to ensure app engagement: to include patients and professionals in their design and to guarantee their usability. The aim of this study was to analyse the perceived usability and quality of the preliminary version of RegulEm, an app based in the Unified Protocol, as part of the second stage of the app development.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A parallel mixed methods study was used with 7 professionals and 4 users who were previously involved in the first stage of the development of the app. MARS, uMARS and SUS scales were used, and two focus groups were conducted. Descriptive statistical analysis and a thematic content analysis were performed in order to gather as much information as possible on RegulEm's usability and quality as well as suggestions for improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RegulEm's usability was perceived through the SUS scale scores as good by users (75 points) and excellent by professionals (84.64 points), while its quality was perceived through the uMARS and MARS scales as good by both groups, with 4 and 4.14 points out of 5. Different areas regarding RegulEm's usability and suggestions for improvement were identified in both focus groups and 20% of the suggestions proposed were implemented in the refined version of RegulEm.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RegulEm's usability and quality were perceived as good by users and professionals and different identified areas have contributed to its refinement. This study provides a more complete picture of RegulEm's usability and quality prior analysing its effectiveness, implementation and cost-effectiveness in Spanish public mental health units.</p>","PeriodicalId":9340,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","volume":"24 1","pages":"267"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11430202/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-024-02679-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Interest in mental health smartphone applications has grown in recent years. Despite their effectiveness and advantages, special attention needs to be paid to two aspects to ensure app engagement: to include patients and professionals in their design and to guarantee their usability. The aim of this study was to analyse the perceived usability and quality of the preliminary version of RegulEm, an app based in the Unified Protocol, as part of the second stage of the app development.

Methods: A parallel mixed methods study was used with 7 professionals and 4 users who were previously involved in the first stage of the development of the app. MARS, uMARS and SUS scales were used, and two focus groups were conducted. Descriptive statistical analysis and a thematic content analysis were performed in order to gather as much information as possible on RegulEm's usability and quality as well as suggestions for improvement.

Results: RegulEm's usability was perceived through the SUS scale scores as good by users (75 points) and excellent by professionals (84.64 points), while its quality was perceived through the uMARS and MARS scales as good by both groups, with 4 and 4.14 points out of 5. Different areas regarding RegulEm's usability and suggestions for improvement were identified in both focus groups and 20% of the suggestions proposed were implemented in the refined version of RegulEm.

Conclusion: RegulEm's usability and quality were perceived as good by users and professionals and different identified areas have contributed to its refinement. This study provides a more complete picture of RegulEm's usability and quality prior analysing its effectiveness, implementation and cost-effectiveness in Spanish public mental health units.

RegulEm,一款基于统一协议的情绪障碍治疗应用程序:一项平行混合方法的可用性和质量研究。
背景:近年来,人们对心理健康智能手机应用程序的兴趣与日俱增。尽管这些应用程序效果显著、优势突出,但仍需特别注意两个方面,以确保应用程序的参与度:让患者和专业人员参与设计,并保证其可用性。本研究的目的是分析RegulEm初步版本的可用性和质量,这是一款基于统一协议的应用程序,也是应用程序开发第二阶段的一部分:方法:采用平行混合方法对 7 名专业人员和 4 名用户进行了研究,他们都曾参与过该应用程序第一阶段的开发工作。使用了 MARS、uMARS 和 SUS 量表,并进行了两次焦点小组讨论。为了尽可能多地收集有关 RegulEm 可用性和质量的信息以及改进建议,我们进行了描述性统计分析和主题内容分析:通过 SUS 量表评分,用户认为 RegulEm 的可用性良好(75 分),专业人员认为 RegulEm 的可用性极佳(84.64 分);通过 uMARS 和 MARS 量表评分,两组用户均认为 RegulEm 的质量良好,满分为 5 分,分别为 4 分和 4.14 分。两个焦点小组都提出了有关 RegulEm 可用性的不同方面和改进建议,其中 20% 的建议在 RegulEm 的改进版中得到了落实:结论:用户和专业人员都认为 RegulEm 的可用性和质量很好,不同领域的发现促进了其完善。本研究在分析 RegulEm 在西班牙公共精神卫生机构的有效性、实施情况和成本效益之前,对其可用性和质量进行了更全面的描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the design, development, implementation, use, and evaluation of health information technologies and decision-making for human health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信