Elisa De Lazzari, Montserrat Laguno, Josep Mallolas, Esteban Martínez
{"title":"HIV临床研究背景下REDCap系统中电子病例报告表的可用性和用户满意度:DOLAM临床试验用例","authors":"Elisa De Lazzari, Montserrat Laguno, Josep Mallolas, Esteban Martínez","doi":"10.1111/jep.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The clinical data management within biomedical research has gained importance over the last decade producing an increasing need of a web-based software application providing electronic data capture and clinical data management functionalities to ensure high quality data. We chose REDCap system over OpenClinica (free-distribution) to implement the electronic case report form (eCRF) at our HIV Unit. We then evaluated eCRF usability and stakeholder satisfaction in an upcoming Phase 4 clinical trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We assessed the perceived usability of the eCRF by different professional users, including nurses, researchers, study monitors and coordinators of the phase-4 clinical trial, and their satisfaction using the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire and the Net Promoter Score (NPS).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Nineteen out of 21 persons involved agreed to participate. All were female, with mean age of 35 years (SD: 7), 11 were study coordinators or monitors, 5 nurses and 3 clinicians/researchers. The median SUS was 72.5 (IQR: 62.5; 80.0): monitors/study coordinators had median score of 77.5, researchers/clinicians, 72.5 and nurses, 57.5. Less Information Technology (IT) or computer-experienced scored higher 92.5 (57.5; 95.0) versus more experienced 71.3 (62.5; 78.8). The overall NPS (% promoters–% detractors) was 21.1, 7 (37%) users were promoters, 9 (47%) passives and 3 (16%) detractors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>When adopting a new system, measuring user's perceived usability and satisfaction in a quantitative manner and with validated measures may be useful to identify users' uncovered needs and to improve future interaction user-system that will positively affect the quality of data managed in clinical research.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Usability and User's Satisfaction of an Electronic Case Report Form Implemented in the REDCap System in the HIV Clinical Research Context: The Use Case of DOLAM Clinical Trial\",\"authors\":\"Elisa De Lazzari, Montserrat Laguno, Josep Mallolas, Esteban Martínez\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jep.70020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>The clinical data management within biomedical research has gained importance over the last decade producing an increasing need of a web-based software application providing electronic data capture and clinical data management functionalities to ensure high quality data. We chose REDCap system over OpenClinica (free-distribution) to implement the electronic case report form (eCRF) at our HIV Unit. We then evaluated eCRF usability and stakeholder satisfaction in an upcoming Phase 4 clinical trial.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We assessed the perceived usability of the eCRF by different professional users, including nurses, researchers, study monitors and coordinators of the phase-4 clinical trial, and their satisfaction using the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire and the Net Promoter Score (NPS).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Nineteen out of 21 persons involved agreed to participate. All were female, with mean age of 35 years (SD: 7), 11 were study coordinators or monitors, 5 nurses and 3 clinicians/researchers. The median SUS was 72.5 (IQR: 62.5; 80.0): monitors/study coordinators had median score of 77.5, researchers/clinicians, 72.5 and nurses, 57.5. Less Information Technology (IT) or computer-experienced scored higher 92.5 (57.5; 95.0) versus more experienced 71.3 (62.5; 78.8). The overall NPS (% promoters–% detractors) was 21.1, 7 (37%) users were promoters, 9 (47%) passives and 3 (16%) detractors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>When adopting a new system, measuring user's perceived usability and satisfaction in a quantitative manner and with validated measures may be useful to identify users' uncovered needs and to improve future interaction user-system that will positively affect the quality of data managed in clinical research.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70020\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Usability and User's Satisfaction of an Electronic Case Report Form Implemented in the REDCap System in the HIV Clinical Research Context: The Use Case of DOLAM Clinical Trial
Background
The clinical data management within biomedical research has gained importance over the last decade producing an increasing need of a web-based software application providing electronic data capture and clinical data management functionalities to ensure high quality data. We chose REDCap system over OpenClinica (free-distribution) to implement the electronic case report form (eCRF) at our HIV Unit. We then evaluated eCRF usability and stakeholder satisfaction in an upcoming Phase 4 clinical trial.
Methods
We assessed the perceived usability of the eCRF by different professional users, including nurses, researchers, study monitors and coordinators of the phase-4 clinical trial, and their satisfaction using the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire and the Net Promoter Score (NPS).
Results
Nineteen out of 21 persons involved agreed to participate. All were female, with mean age of 35 years (SD: 7), 11 were study coordinators or monitors, 5 nurses and 3 clinicians/researchers. The median SUS was 72.5 (IQR: 62.5; 80.0): monitors/study coordinators had median score of 77.5, researchers/clinicians, 72.5 and nurses, 57.5. Less Information Technology (IT) or computer-experienced scored higher 92.5 (57.5; 95.0) versus more experienced 71.3 (62.5; 78.8). The overall NPS (% promoters–% detractors) was 21.1, 7 (37%) users were promoters, 9 (47%) passives and 3 (16%) detractors.
Conclusions
When adopting a new system, measuring user's perceived usability and satisfaction in a quantitative manner and with validated measures may be useful to identify users' uncovered needs and to improve future interaction user-system that will positively affect the quality of data managed in clinical research.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.