评估患者使用基于网络的眼科筛查工具 PocDoc 的体验。

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmology and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1007/s40123-024-00948-5

Daniel Chin, Joewee Boon, William Rojas-Carabali, Shannon Choo, Carlos Cifuentes-González, Rupesh Agrawal

{"title":"评估患者使用基于网络的眼科筛查工具 PocDoc 的体验。","authors":"Daniel Chin, Joewee Boon, William Rojas-Carabali, Shannon Choo, Carlos Cifuentes-González, Rupesh Agrawal","doi":"10.1007/s40123-024-00948-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The efficacy of diagnostic and monitoring tools in ophthalmology is significantly influenced by patient engagement levels. This presents a notable challenge, especially in the context of developing tools designed for telemedicine applications. Ensuring consistent patient engagement is therefore crucial for the accurate and reliable utilization of these technologies. This study assesses patient perceptions and experiences after using a purpose-built web application, called PocDoc.Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted among 440 patients recruited from general and specialist eye clinics between March 2022 and October 2023, both before and after using the PocDoc app.Results: Pre-test findings revealed that 86.8% of patients thought that a remote eye monitoring application would have use, while 70.9% anticipated frequent usage. Only 16.4% found it overly complex, and 55.2% perceived it as easy to use. Additionally, 34.5% foresaw the need for technical support, while 72.5% believed they would quickly grasp its use. In the post-test questionnaire, 63.3% of patients still expressed intent for frequent PocDoc usage. The perception of complexity decreased to 20.4%, with 79.3% finding it easy to use. The belief in the need for technical support decreased to 36.5%, while 89.9% felt confident in mastering the application quickly. Moreover, 77.3% found the application's functions well-integrated, and 64.6% were very confident using PocDoc.Conclusions: Results suggest patient receptivity to web-based applications, confirming their viability for specific patient groups. Overall, our study contributes to the growing body of evidence indicating that greater exposure to digital health tools can significantly influence patient acceptance and perceived ease of use, an insight that has important implications for the implementation and design of these technologies in clinical settings.","PeriodicalId":19623,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11109045/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Patient Experiences with PocDoc, a Web-Based Eye Screening Tool.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Chin, Joewee Boon, William Rojas-Carabali, Shannon Choo, Carlos Cifuentes-González, Rupesh Agrawal\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40123-024-00948-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The efficacy of diagnostic and monitoring tools in ophthalmology is significantly influenced by patient engagement levels. This presents a notable challenge, especially in the context of developing tools designed for telemedicine applications. Ensuring consistent patient engagement is therefore crucial for the accurate and reliable utilization of these technologies. This study assesses patient perceptions and experiences after using a purpose-built web application, called PocDoc.Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted among 440 patients recruited from general and specialist eye clinics between March 2022 and October 2023, both before and after using the PocDoc app.Results: Pre-test findings revealed that 86.8% of patients thought that a remote eye monitoring application would have use, while 70.9% anticipated frequent usage. Only 16.4% found it overly complex, and 55.2% perceived it as easy to use. Additionally, 34.5% foresaw the need for technical support, while 72.5% believed they would quickly grasp its use. In the post-test questionnaire, 63.3% of patients still expressed intent for frequent PocDoc usage. The perception of complexity decreased to 20.4%, with 79.3% finding it easy to use. The belief in the need for technical support decreased to 36.5%, while 89.9% felt confident in mastering the application quickly. Moreover, 77.3% found the application's functions well-integrated, and 64.6% were very confident using PocDoc.Conclusions: Results suggest patient receptivity to web-based applications, confirming their viability for specific patient groups. Overall, our study contributes to the growing body of evidence indicating that greater exposure to digital health tools can significantly influence patient acceptance and perceived ease of use, an insight that has important implications for the implementation and design of these technologies in clinical settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19623,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology and Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11109045/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-024-00948-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-024-00948-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

导言：眼科诊断和监控工具的功效在很大程度上受到患者参与程度的影响。这就提出了一个显著的挑战，尤其是在开发远程医疗应用工具时。因此，确保患者的持续参与对于准确可靠地使用这些技术至关重要。本研究评估了患者在使用名为 PocDoc 的专用网络应用程序后的感知和体验：方法：在 2022 年 3 月至 2023 年 10 月期间，对普通眼科诊所和专科眼科诊所招募的 440 名患者在使用 PocDoc 应用程序前后的情况进行了横向问卷调查：测试前的调查结果显示，86.8%的患者认为远程眼科监测应用程序有其用途，70.9%的患者预计会经常使用。只有 16.4% 的人认为它过于复杂，55.2% 的人认为它易于使用。此外，34.5% 的人认为需要技术支持，72.5% 的人认为他们会很快掌握其使用方法。在测试后的问卷调查中，63.3% 的患者仍表示有意经常使用 PocDoc。对其复杂性的认识下降到 20.4%，79.3% 的人认为其易于使用。认为需要技术支持的比例下降到 36.5%，89.9% 的人有信心快速掌握该应用程序。此外，77.3% 的人认为该应用程序的功能集成度很高，64.6% 的人对使用 PocDoc 非常有信心：结论：研究结果表明，患者对网络应用程序的接受程度很高，证实了其在特定患者群体中的可行性。总之，我们的研究为越来越多的证据做出了贡献，这些证据表明，更多地接触数字医疗工具会极大地影响患者的接受度和感知易用性，这一见解对这些技术在临床环境中的实施和设计具有重要意义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Evaluation of Patient Experiences with PocDoc, a Web-Based Eye Screening Tool.

Introduction: The efficacy of diagnostic and monitoring tools in ophthalmology is significantly influenced by patient engagement levels. This presents a notable challenge, especially in the context of developing tools designed for telemedicine applications. Ensuring consistent patient engagement is therefore crucial for the accurate and reliable utilization of these technologies. This study assesses patient perceptions and experiences after using a purpose-built web application, called PocDoc.

Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted among 440 patients recruited from general and specialist eye clinics between March 2022 and October 2023, both before and after using the PocDoc app.

Results: Pre-test findings revealed that 86.8% of patients thought that a remote eye monitoring application would have use, while 70.9% anticipated frequent usage. Only 16.4% found it overly complex, and 55.2% perceived it as easy to use. Additionally, 34.5% foresaw the need for technical support, while 72.5% believed they would quickly grasp its use. In the post-test questionnaire, 63.3% of patients still expressed intent for frequent PocDoc usage. The perception of complexity decreased to 20.4%, with 79.3% finding it easy to use. The belief in the need for technical support decreased to 36.5%, while 89.9% felt confident in mastering the application quickly. Moreover, 77.3% found the application's functions well-integrated, and 64.6% were very confident using PocDoc.

Conclusions: Results suggest patient receptivity to web-based applications, confirming their viability for specific patient groups. Overall, our study contributes to the growing body of evidence indicating that greater exposure to digital health tools can significantly influence patient acceptance and perceived ease of use, an insight that has important implications for the implementation and design of these technologies in clinical settings.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Ophthalmology and Therapy OPHTHALMOLOGY-

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

3.00%

发文量

157

审稿时长

6 weeks

期刊介绍： Aims and Scope Ophthalmology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed (single-blind), and rapid publication journal. The scope of the journal is broad and will consider all scientifically sound research from preclinical, clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the use of ophthalmological therapies, devices, and surgical techniques. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/series, trial protocols and short communications such as commentaries and editorials. Ophthalmology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. Rapid Publication The journal’s publication timelines aim for a rapid peer review of 2 weeks. If an article is accepted it will be published 3–4 weeks from acceptance. The rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid, efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, fostering the advancement of ophthalmic therapies. Open Access All articles published by Ophthalmology and Therapy are open access. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning authors will always have an editorial contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Ophthalmology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5250/$6000/£4300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case by case basis. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials, and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors’ or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in one of our journals. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please follow the link for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Copyright Ophthalmology and Therapy''s content is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact christopher.vautrinot@springer.com.