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

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-12 DOI:10.1111/jep.70020
Elisa De Lazzari, Montserrat Laguno, Josep Mallolas, Esteban Martínez
{"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,&nbsp;Montserrat Laguno,&nbsp;Josep Mallolas,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Psychometric Properties of Self-Reported Financial Toxicity Measures in Cancer Survivors: An Overview of Systematic Reviews The Current Status and Factors Influencing the Discharge Readiness of Parents of Children With Pneumonia: A Cross-Sectional Survey 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 Remote Spirometry, Education, and Action for COPD Diagnosis and Management in Rural and Medically Underserved Settings in South Carolina: Protocol for an Observational Feasibility Study Effect of a Volunteer-Staffed Outreach Call Initiative on Video Usage and Attendance for Telehealth Visits in an Urban Primary Care Safety-Net 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: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