Display options
Cite
Fu MR, Axelrod D, Guth AA, et al. Usability and feasibility of health IT interventions to enhance Self-Care for Lymphedema Symptom Management in breast cancer survivors. Internet Interv. 2016;5:56-64doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.08.001.
Fu, M. R., Axelrod, D., Guth, A. A., Wang, Y., Scagliola, J., Hiotis, K., Rampertaap, K., & El-Shammaa, N. (2016). Usability and feasibility of health IT interventions to enhance Self-Care for Lymphedema Symptom Management in breast cancer survivors. Internet interventions, 556-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2016.08.001
Fu, Mei R, et al. "Usability and feasibility of health IT interventions to enhance Self-Care for Lymphedema Symptom Management in breast cancer survivors." Internet interventions vol. 5 (2016): 56-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2016.08.001
Fu MR, Axelrod D, Guth AA, Wang Y, Scagliola J, Hiotis K, Rampertaap K, El-Shammaa N. Usability and feasibility of health IT interventions to enhance Self-Care for Lymphedema Symptom Management in breast cancer survivors. Internet Interv. 2016 Sep;5:56-64. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.08.001. Epub 2016 Aug 04. PMID: 28255542; PMCID: PMC5328240.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Internet Interv. 2016 Sep;5:56-64. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.08.001. Epub 2016 Aug 04.

Usability and feasibility of health IT interventions to enhance Self-Care for Lymphedema Symptom Management in breast cancer survivors.

Internet interventions

Mei R Fu, Deborah Axelrod, Amber A Guth, Yao Wang, Joan Scagliola, Karen Hiotis, Kavita Rampertaap, Nardin El-Shammaa

Affiliations

  1. NYU Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York University, New York, NY, United States.
  2. Department of Surgery, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States; NYU Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
  3. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Tandon School of Engineering, New York University, New York, NY, United States.
  4. NYU Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
  5. NYU Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York University, New York, NY, United States; NYU Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.

PMID: 28255542 PMCID: PMC5328240 DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.08.001

Abstract

METHODS: Two types of usability testing were completed with 30 breast cancer survivors: heuristic evaluation and end-user testing. Each participant was asked to think aloud while completing a set of specified tasks designed to explicate and freely explore the system features. A heuristic evaluation checklist, the Perceived Ease of Use and Usefulness Questionnaire, and The Post Study System Usability Questionnaire were used to evaluate usability of the system. Open-ended questions were used to gather qualitative data. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data were summarized thematically.

RESULTS: Breast cancer survivors were very satisfied with the system: 90% (n = 27) rated the system having no usability problems; 10% (n = 3) noted minor cosmetic problems: spelling errors or text font size. The majority of participants 96.6% (n = 29) strongly agreed that the system was easy to use and effective in helping to learn about lymphedema, symptoms and self-care strategies. Themes from the qualitative data included empowerment, high quality information, loving avatar simulation videos, easy accessibility, and user-friendliness.

CONCLUSIONS: This usability study provided evidence on breast cancer survivor's acceptance and highly positive evaluation of TOLF's usability as well as feasibility of using technologically-driven delivery model to enhance self-care strategies for lymphedema symptom management.

Keywords: Breast cancer survivor; Breast neoplasms; Feasibility; Health IT; Lymphedema; Lymphedema symptoms; Self-care; Symptoms; Usability

References

  1. Lymphology. 2009 Dec;42(4):161-75 - PubMed
  2. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Jul;17(7):1847-53 - PubMed
  3. Cancer Nurs. 2014 Jan-Feb;37(1):23-33 - PubMed
  4. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016 Jan 21;5(1):e7 - PubMed
  5. Support Care Cancer. 2011 Jun;19(6):853-7 - PubMed
  6. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2015 Oct 15;7:345-52 - PubMed
  7. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2004 Jan-Feb;31(1):65-70 - PubMed
  8. Nurs Res. 2003 Nov-Dec;52(6):370-9 - PubMed
  9. Support Care Cancer. 2011 May;19(5):631-7 - PubMed
  10. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2014;18 Suppl:68-79 - PubMed
  11. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Oct;21(11):3481-9 - PubMed
  12. Nurs Res. 2008 Nov-Dec;57(6):416-25 - PubMed
  13. Comput Nurs. 1998 May-Jun;16(3):151-6 - PubMed
  14. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009 Dec;38(6):849-59 - PubMed
  15. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2012 Jun;(206):1-1531 - PubMed
  16. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006;:864 - PubMed
  17. Cancer. 1998 Dec 15;83(12 Suppl American):2817-20 - PubMed
  18. J Lymphoedema. 2010;5(2):39-48 - PubMed
  19. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2015 Mar;47(2):126-34 - PubMed
  20. Psychooncology. 2015 Dec;24(12 ):1655-62 - PubMed
  21. Cancer Causes Control. 2006 Sep;17(7):861-9 - PubMed
  22. Lymphology. 2010 Sep;43(3):118-27 - PubMed
  23. Lymphat Res Biol. 2009;7(1):29-45 - PubMed
  24. Psychooncology. 2013 Jul;22(7):1466-84 - PubMed
  25. J Pers Med. 2015 Sep 03;5(3):326-40 - PubMed
  26. Support Care Cancer. 2005 Nov;13(11):904-11 - PubMed
  27. Cancer. 2001 Sep 15;92(6):1368-77 - PubMed
  28. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011 Mar-Apr;61(2):69-90 - PubMed
  29. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010 Nov;19(11):2734-46 - PubMed
  30. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2012 Sep;3(5):307-18 - PubMed
  31. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 Jul;16(7):1959-72 - PubMed
  32. Nurs Res. 2012 Jul-Aug;61(4):291-9 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support