Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36001089›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical engineering & technology2022

Usability engineering in practice: developing an intervention for post-stroke therapy during a global pandemic.

Avril D McCarthy, Louise Moody, Mark L Reeves, T Jamie Healey, Tim Good, Lise Sproson, Adewale Adebajo, Wendy Tindale, Krishnan Padmakumari Sivaraman Nair

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical engineering & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Avril D McCarthyClinical Engineering, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Louise MoodyNIHR Devices for Dignity MedTech Co-operative, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Mark L ReevesClinical Engineering, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
T Jamie HealeyClinical Engineering, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Tim GoodClinical Engineering, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Lise SprosonNIHR Devices for Dignity MedTech Co-operative, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Adewale AdebajoDepartment of Rheumatology, Barnsley Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Barnsley, UK.
Wendy TindaleNIHR Devices for Dignity MedTech Co-operative, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Krishnan Padmakumari Sivaraman NairDepartment of Neurology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBBarnsley Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBDevices for Dignity · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper provides an overview of the usability engineering process and relevant standards informing the development of medical devices, together with adaptations to accommodate situations such as global pandemics where use of traditional face-to-face methods is restricted. To highlight some of those adaptations, a case study of a project developing a novel electronic rehabilitation device is referenced, which commenced in November 2020 amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. The Sheffield Adaptive Patterned Electrical Stimulation (SHAPES) project, led by Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (STH), aimed to design, manufacture and trial an intervention for use to treat upper arm spasticity after stroke. Presented is an outline and discussion of the challenges experienced in developing the SHAPES health technology intended for at-home use by stroke survivors and in implementing usability engineering approaches. Also highlighted, are the benefits that arose, which can offer easier involvement of vulnerable users and add flexibility in the ways that user feedback is sought. Challenges included: restricted travel; access to usual prototyping facilities; social distancing; infection prevention and control; availability of components; and changing work pressures and demands. Whereas benefits include: less travel; less time commitment; and greater scope for participants with restricted mobility to participate in the process. The paper advocates a more flexible approach to usability engineering and outlines the onward path for development and trialling of the SHAPES technology.

Indexed as

COVID-19StrokeStroke RehabilitationArmHumansPandemicsinterventionSHAPESStrokestroke therapyusability engineering

Identifiers

PMID36001089
PMCPMC9612925
OpenAlexW4292951897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.