ArticleBMC health services research2025
Assessing user experience with the Bioline™ HCV point-of-care test in primary healthcare settings: a mixed-methods study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatitis C Virus (HCV) is a major public health challenge, particularly in resource-limited settings with inadequate diagnostic services. The Bioline™ HCV Point-of-Care (POC) test provides a promising solution for improving diagnosis in Primary Healthcare (PHC) clinics without laboratory infrastructure. This study evaluated the test's usability, acceptability, and deliverability in Ghana using user-oriented REASSURED criteria.
methodsA convergent parallel mixed-methods design was adopted. Quantitative data was collected through direct observation of Healthcare Workers (HCWs) using audit checklists and analyzed with Stata 16. The analysis included descriptive statistics, inter-rater concordance assessment, and the application of the System Usability Scale (SUS). Qualitative data, analyzed using Atlas.ti 24.2.0, explored user experiences, confidence, storage infrastructure, and suggestions for test design improvement through in-depth interviews.
resultsThe quantitative audit included 81 non-laboratory HCWs, with 22 participating in in-depth interviews. The test scored 88.7 on the SUS (95% CI: 86.40-90.88), with 88% of HCWs rating it as easy or very easy to use. Most HCWs (81.5%) successfully completed all testing steps independently, achieving 100% inter-rater concordance, but 83% made errors in at least one step, primarily during pre-testing. Qualitative findings revealed widespread acceptance, confidence, and adaptability despite challenges with storage infrastructure. DISCUSSION: The Bioline™ HCV POC test demonstrated high usability and acceptance among HCWs in resource-limited settings. Enhancements such as improved packaging, simplified information sheets, refined droppers, and additional components like gloves could further optimize usability. These findings support the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3 by enhancing access to timely HCV diagnosis, contributing to Universal Health Coverage, and strengthening health systems in underserved areas.
trial registrationThis study is part of a diagnostic trial registered in the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry ( https://pactr.samrc.ac.za ) on 24th October 2024 with trial registration number: PACTR202410837698664.
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.