Factors that facilitate or hinder the use of the facial rehabilitation webtool MEPP 2.0: a comparative study in the Quebecer health system.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Health Services Research Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1186/s12913-024-11628-2
Sarah Martineau, Jacinthe Barbeau, Alyssia Paquin, Karine Marcotte
{"title":"Factors that facilitate or hinder the use of the facial rehabilitation webtool MEPP 2.0: a comparative study in the Quebecer health system.","authors":"Sarah Martineau, Jacinthe Barbeau, Alyssia Paquin, Karine Marcotte","doi":"10.1186/s12913-024-11628-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recently, our research team developed an open source and free website called the MEPP website (for the Mirror Effect Plus Protocol) to efficiently provide mirror therapy for patients with facial palsy. Previous studies demonstrated that the first version of the MEPP website improved user experience and likely optimized patients' performance during facial therapy. Nevertheless, compliance was found to be low despite a generally positive opinion of the website, and in light of our earlier findings, MEPP 2.0-a revised and enhanced version of the MEPP 0.1-was created. The purpose of this study was to examine and contrast various factors that help or impede institutional partners of the Quebec health care system from using the MEPP 2.0 website in comparison to its initial version.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-one patients with facial palsy and nineteen clinicians working with this population were enrolled in a within-subject crossover study. For both the MEPP 1.0 and MEPP 2.0, user experience was assessed for all participants. Embodiment was assessed in patients, and factors influencing clinical use were assessed by clinicians. Qualitative comments about their experiences were also gathered. Descriptive statistics and reliability measures were calculated. Differences between the two MEPP versions were assessed using the linear mixed model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, patients appreciated more the MEPP 2.0 (OR = 4.57; p < 0.001), and all clinicians preferred the MEPP 2.0 over the MEPP 1.0. For patients, it seems that facial ownership, as well as possession and control of facial movements, was significantly better with the MEPP 2.0. For clinicians, the MEPP 2.0 specifically allowed them to self-evaluate their intervention and follow up with more objectivity. The use of the MEPP 2.0 was also modulated by what their patients reported. Qualitatively, options to access an Android app and needs for improving the exercises bank were mentioned as hindering factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The updated version of the MEPP website, the MEPP 2.0, was preferred by our different partners.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10885397 . The trial was registered before the start of the study on the 1<sup>st</sup> December 2023.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"24 1","pages":"1256"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11487791/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11628-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Recently, our research team developed an open source and free website called the MEPP website (for the Mirror Effect Plus Protocol) to efficiently provide mirror therapy for patients with facial palsy. Previous studies demonstrated that the first version of the MEPP website improved user experience and likely optimized patients' performance during facial therapy. Nevertheless, compliance was found to be low despite a generally positive opinion of the website, and in light of our earlier findings, MEPP 2.0-a revised and enhanced version of the MEPP 0.1-was created. The purpose of this study was to examine and contrast various factors that help or impede institutional partners of the Quebec health care system from using the MEPP 2.0 website in comparison to its initial version.

Methods: Forty-one patients with facial palsy and nineteen clinicians working with this population were enrolled in a within-subject crossover study. For both the MEPP 1.0 and MEPP 2.0, user experience was assessed for all participants. Embodiment was assessed in patients, and factors influencing clinical use were assessed by clinicians. Qualitative comments about their experiences were also gathered. Descriptive statistics and reliability measures were calculated. Differences between the two MEPP versions were assessed using the linear mixed model.

Results: Overall, patients appreciated more the MEPP 2.0 (OR = 4.57; p < 0.001), and all clinicians preferred the MEPP 2.0 over the MEPP 1.0. For patients, it seems that facial ownership, as well as possession and control of facial movements, was significantly better with the MEPP 2.0. For clinicians, the MEPP 2.0 specifically allowed them to self-evaluate their intervention and follow up with more objectivity. The use of the MEPP 2.0 was also modulated by what their patients reported. Qualitatively, options to access an Android app and needs for improving the exercises bank were mentioned as hindering factors.

Conclusions: The updated version of the MEPP website, the MEPP 2.0, was preferred by our different partners.

Trial registration: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10885397 . The trial was registered before the start of the study on the 1st December 2023.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
促进或阻碍使用面部康复网络工具 MEPP 2.0 的因素:魁北克医疗系统比较研究。
背景:最近,我们的研究团队开发了一个开源免费网站,名为 MEPP 网站(意为镜面效应增强协议),旨在为面瘫患者提供高效的镜面治疗。之前的研究表明,MEPP 网站的第一个版本改善了用户体验,并有可能优化患者在面部治疗过程中的表现。然而,尽管人们对该网站的评价普遍较高,但依从性却很低。鉴于我们之前的研究结果,我们创建了 MEPP 2.0--MEPP 0.1 的修订和增强版本。本研究的目的是对魁北克医疗保健系统的机构合作伙伴使用 MEPP 2.0 网站的各种有利或不利因素进行研究和对比:四十一名面瘫患者和十九名从事面瘫患者工作的临床医生参加了课题内交叉研究。对于 MEPP 1.0 和 MEPP 2.0,对所有参与者的用户体验进行了评估。对患者的体现进行了评估,并由临床医生对影响临床使用的因素进行了评估。此外,还收集了他们对使用体验的定性评论。对描述性统计和可靠性测量进行了计算。使用线性混合模型评估了两种 MEPP 版本之间的差异:总体而言,患者更欣赏 MEPP 2.0(OR = 4.57;P 结论:患者更喜欢 MEPP 2.0:MEPP网站的更新版本,即MEPP 2.0,受到了我们不同合作伙伴的青睐。试验注册:https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10885397 。该试验于 2023 年 12 月 1 日研究开始前注册。
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
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
期刊最新文献
A systematic review and meta-analysis of healthcare service quality in Iran using the SERVQUAL model: a comparison before and after the Health Transformation Plan. What drives patients' preferences for cancer care in South Korea's capital area? A study on preferences concerning cancer care facilities. Opportunities and lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study of health program managers' perspectives in Ethiopia. Impact of public hospital restructuring on the admission of elderly residents in Japan: a regional population-based study. Enhancing sterilization supply management: a pre-post study on the impact of an integrated information system in a multi-campus hospital setting.
×
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:604180095
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