Clinical Utility and Usability of the Digital Box and Block Test: Mixed Methods Study.

Eveline Prochaska, Elske Ammenwerth
{"title":"Clinical Utility and Usability of the Digital Box and Block Test: Mixed Methods Study.","authors":"Eveline Prochaska, Elske Ammenwerth","doi":"10.2196/54939","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Box and Block Test (BBT) is a clinical tool used to measure hand dexterity, which is often used for tracking disease progression or the effectiveness of therapy, particularly benefiting older adults and those with neurological conditions. Digitizing the measurement of hand function may enhance the quality of data collection. We have developed and validated a prototype that digitizes this test, known as the digital BBT (dBBT), which automatically measures time and determines and displays the test result.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the clinical utility and usability of the newly developed dBBT and to collect suggestions for future improvements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 4 occupational therapists participated in our study. To evaluate the clinical utility, we compared the dBBT to the BBT across dimensions such as acceptance, portability, energy and effort, time, and costs. We observed therapists using the dBBT as a dexterity measurement tool and conducted a quantitative usability questionnaire using the System Usability Scale (SUS), along with a focus group. Evaluative, structured, and qualitative content analysis was used for the qualitative data, whereas quantitative analysis was applied to questionnaire data. The qualitative and quantitative data were merged and analyzed using a convergent mixed methods approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the results of the evaluative content analysis suggested that the dBBT had a better clinical utility than the original BBT, with ratings of all collected participant statements for the dBBT being 45% (45/99) equal to, 48% (48/99) better than, and 6% (6/99) lesser than the BBT. Particularly in the subcategories \"acceptance,\" \"time required for evaluation,\" and \"purchase costs,\" the dBBT was rated as being better than the original BBT. The dBBT achieved a mean SUS score of 83 (95% CI 76-96). Additionally, several suggested changes to the system were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study demonstrated an overall positive evaluation of the clinical utility and usability of the dBBT. Valuable insights were gathered for future system iterations. These pioneering results highlight the potential of digitizing hand dexterity assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":36224,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies","volume":"11 ","pages":"e54939"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11137429/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/54939","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Box and Block Test (BBT) is a clinical tool used to measure hand dexterity, which is often used for tracking disease progression or the effectiveness of therapy, particularly benefiting older adults and those with neurological conditions. Digitizing the measurement of hand function may enhance the quality of data collection. We have developed and validated a prototype that digitizes this test, known as the digital BBT (dBBT), which automatically measures time and determines and displays the test result.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the clinical utility and usability of the newly developed dBBT and to collect suggestions for future improvements.

Methods: A total of 4 occupational therapists participated in our study. To evaluate the clinical utility, we compared the dBBT to the BBT across dimensions such as acceptance, portability, energy and effort, time, and costs. We observed therapists using the dBBT as a dexterity measurement tool and conducted a quantitative usability questionnaire using the System Usability Scale (SUS), along with a focus group. Evaluative, structured, and qualitative content analysis was used for the qualitative data, whereas quantitative analysis was applied to questionnaire data. The qualitative and quantitative data were merged and analyzed using a convergent mixed methods approach.

Results: Overall, the results of the evaluative content analysis suggested that the dBBT had a better clinical utility than the original BBT, with ratings of all collected participant statements for the dBBT being 45% (45/99) equal to, 48% (48/99) better than, and 6% (6/99) lesser than the BBT. Particularly in the subcategories "acceptance," "time required for evaluation," and "purchase costs," the dBBT was rated as being better than the original BBT. The dBBT achieved a mean SUS score of 83 (95% CI 76-96). Additionally, several suggested changes to the system were identified.

Conclusions: The study demonstrated an overall positive evaluation of the clinical utility and usability of the dBBT. Valuable insights were gathered for future system iterations. These pioneering results highlight the potential of digitizing hand dexterity assessments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字盒和块测试的临床实用性和可用性:混合方法研究
背景:盒块测试(BBT)是一种用于测量手部灵活性的临床工具,通常用于跟踪疾病进展或治疗效果,尤其对老年人和神经系统疾病患者有益。手部功能测量的数字化可提高数据收集的质量。我们开发并验证了一种将该测试数字化的原型,即数字 BBT(dBBT),它能自动测量时间并确定和显示测试结果:本研究旨在调查新开发的 dBBT 的临床实用性和可用性,并收集对未来改进的建议:共有 4 名职业治疗师参与了我们的研究。为了评估临床实用性,我们从接受度、便携性、精力和努力、时间和成本等方面对 dBBT 和 BBT 进行了比较。我们观察了治疗师使用 dBBT 作为灵巧性测量工具的情况,并使用系统可用性量表(SUS)和焦点小组进行了可用性定量问卷调查。对定性数据采用了评价性、结构性和定性内容分析,而对问卷数据则采用了定量分析。对定性和定量数据进行了合并,并采用聚合混合方法进行了分析:总体而言,评价性内容分析的结果表明,dBBT的临床实用性优于原始BBT,在所有收集到的参与者陈述中,dBBT的评分与BBT相等的占45%(45/99),优于BBT的占48%(48/99),低于BBT的占6%(6/99)。特别是在 "接受程度"、"评估所需时间 "和 "购买成本 "这三个子类别中,dBBT 被评为优于原始 BBT。dBBT 的平均 SUS 得分为 83(95% CI 76-96)。此外,还提出了对该系统的几项修改建议:研究表明,dBBT 的临床实用性和可用性总体上得到了积极评价。为今后的系统迭代收集了宝贵的意见。这些开创性的结果凸显了手部灵活性评估数字化的潜力。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigation Training for Persons With Visual Disability Through Multisensory Assistive Technology: Mixed Methods Experimental Study. Mainstream Technologies in Facilities for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Multiple-Methods Study Using the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability Framework. Capabilities for Using Telemonitoring in Physiotherapy Treatment: Exploratory Qualitative Study. Integrated Approach Using Intuitionistic Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision-Making to Support Classifier Selection for Technology Adoption in Patients with Parkinson Disease: Algorithm Development and Validation. Multidisciplinary Home-Based Rehabilitation Program for Individuals With Disabilities: Longitudinal Observational Study.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1