ArticleJMIR human factors2024
Acceptance and User Experiences of a Wearable Device for the Management of Hospitalized Patients in COVID-19-Designated Wards in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Action Learning Project.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWearable devices have been used extensively both inside and outside of the hospital setting. During the COVID-19 pandemic, in some contexts, there was an increased need to remotely monitor pulse and saturated oxygen for patients due to the lack of staff and bedside monitors.
objectiveA prototype of a remote monitoring system using wearable pulse oximeter devices was implemented at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, from August to December 2021. The aim of this work was to support the ongoing implementation of the remote monitoring system.
methodsWe used an action learning approach with rapid pragmatic methods, including informal discussions and observations as well as a feedback survey form designed based on the technology acceptance model to assess the use and acceptability of the system. Based on these results, we facilitated a meeting using user-centered design principles to explore user needs and ideas about its development in more detail.
resultsIn total, 21 users filled in the feedback form. The mean technology acceptance model scores ranged from 3.5 (for perceived ease of use) to 4.4 (for attitude) with behavioral intention (3.8) and perceived usefulness (4.2) scoring in between. Those working as nurses scored higher on perceived usefulness, attitude, and behavioral intention than did physicians. Based on informal discussions, we realized there was a mismatch between how we (ie, the research team) and the ward teams perceived the use and wider purpose of the technology.
conclusionsDesigning and implementing the devices to be more nurse-centric from their introduction could have helped to increase their efficiency and use during the complex pandemic period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.