Cited by 79Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsElectronic Health Records SystemsUsability and User Interface Design

Usability and feasibility of a tablet-based Decision-Support and Integrated Record-keeping (DESIRE) tool in the nurse management of hypertension in rural western Kenya

Open access
Vedanthan, Rajesh, Blank, Evan, Tuikong, Nelly, Kamano, Jemima, Misoi, Lawrence, Tulienge, Deborah, Hutchinson, Claire, Ascheim, Deborah D. +3 more·2015·International Journal of Medical Informatics

Abstract

Background Mobile health (mHealth) applications have recently proliferated, especially in low- and middle-income countries, complementing task-redistribution strategies with clinical decision support. Relatively few studies address usability and feasibility issues that may impact success or failure of implementation, and few have been conducted for non-communicable diseases such as hypertension. Objective To conduct iterative usability and feasibility testing of a tablet-based Decision Support and Integrated Record-keeping (DESIRE) tool, a technology intended to assist rural clinicians taking care of hypertension patients at the community level in a resource-limited setting in western Kenya. Methods Usability testing consisted of "think aloud" exercises and "mock patient encounters" with five nurses, as well as one focus group discussion. Feasibility testing consisted of semi-structured interviews of five nurses and two members of the implementation team, and one focus group discussion with nurses. Content analysis was performed using both deductive codes and significant inductive codes. Critical incidents were identified and ranked according to severity. A cause-of-error analysis was used to develop corresponding design change suggestions. Results Fifty-seven critical incidents were identified in usability testing, 21 of which were unique. The cause-of-error analysis yielded 23 design change suggestions. Feasibility themes included barriers to implementation along both human and technical axes, facilitators to implementation, provider issues, patient issues and feature requests. Conclusions This participatory, iterative human-centered design process revealed previously unaddressed usability and feasibility issues affecting the implementation of the DESIRE tool in western Kenya. In addition to well-known technical issues, we highlight the importance of human factors that can impact implementation of mHealth interventions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.12.005

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Usability and feasibility of mUzima have previously been assessed in an implementation to support nurses in managing hypertensive patients.

    “Usability and feasibility of mUzima have previously been assessed in an implementation to support nurses in managing hypertensive patients [52].”

    From mUzima Mobile Electronic Health Record (EHR) System: Development and Implementation at Scale (2021) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Discussion reports usability and feasibility testing of a tool used by nurses managing hypertension. The Methods > Setting identifies the tested application as DESIRE, and the passages found in our copy do not identify it as mUzima. The claim’s description of the assessment is supported, but its identification of the application is not. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [32]Rubin J Handbook of Usability Testing 1994 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vedanthan, R., Blank, E., Tuikong, N., Kamano, J., Misoi, L., Tulienge, D., Hutchinson, C., Ascheim, D. D., Kimaiyo, S., Fuster, V., & Were, M. C.
Affiliations
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • AMPATH (KE)
  • Moi University (KE)
  • Regenstrief Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Vedanthan, Rajesh
Venue
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-03
Volume
84
Issue
3
Pages
207-219
ISSN
1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2121151790
Cited by
79
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
9.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Fogarty International Center
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
mobile health, clinical decision support, tablet application, antihypertensive therapy, nurse-led care, rural health care, usability testing, feasibility, critical incidents, human-centered design, implementation barriers and facilitators, non-communicable diseases, Western Kenya
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Computers, Cooperative Behavior, Feasibility Studies, Humans, Hypertension, Kenya, Nurses, Rural Population, User-Computer Interface, Focus Groups, Equipment Failure Analysis, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Computers, Handheld, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review