MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3184166275 · doi:10.2196/30867

User Experience in Remote Surgical Consultation: Survey Study of User Acceptance and Satisfaction in Real-Time Use of a Telemedicine Service

2021· article· en· W3184166275 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hedvig Aminoff, Sebastiaan Meijer, Kristina Groth, Urban Arnelo

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Human Factors · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésUsabilityTelemedicineService (business)Patient satisfactionMedicineGeneral partnershipScope (computer science)Medical educationNursingComputer scienceHealth careBusinessHuman–computer interactionMarketing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Teleguidance, a promising telemedicine service for intraoperative surgical consultation, was planned to scale up at a major academic hospital in partnership with 5 other hospitals. If the service was adopted and used over time, it was expected to provide educational benefits and improve clinical outcomes during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which is a technically advanced procedure for biliary and pancreatic disease. However, it is known that seemingly successful innovations can play out differently in new settings, which might cause variability in clinical outcomes. In addition, few telemedicine services survive long enough to deliver system-level outcomes, the causes of which are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: We were interested in factors related to usability and user experience of the telemedicine service, which might affect adoption. Therefore, we investigated perceptions and responses to the use and anticipated use of a system. Technology acceptance, a construct referring to how users perceive a technology's usefulness, is commonly considered to indicate whether a new technology will actually be used in a real-life setting. Satisfaction measures were used to investigate whether user expectations and needs have been met through the use of technology. In this study, we asked surgeons to rate the perceived usefulness of teleguidance, and their satisfaction with the telemedicine service in direct conjunction with real-time use during clinical procedures. METHODS: We designed domain-specific measures for perceived usefulness and satisfaction, based on performance and outcome measures for the clinical procedure. Surgeons were asked to rate their user experience with the telemedicine service in direct conjunction with real-time use during clinical procedures. RESULTS: In total, 142 remote intraoperative consultations were conducted during ERCP procedures at 5 hospitals. The demand for teleguidance was more pronounced in cases with higher complexity. Operating surgeons rated teleguidance to have contributed to performance and outcomes to a moderate or large extent in 111 of 140 (79.3%) cases. Specific examples were that teleguidance was rated as having contributed to intervention success and avoiding a repeated ERCP in 23 cases, avoiding 3 PTC, and 11 referrals, and in 11 cases, combinations of these outcomes. Preprocedure beliefs about the usefulness of teleguidance were generally lower than postprocedure satisfaction ratings. The usefulness of teleguidance was mainly experienced through practical advice from the consulting specialist (119/140, 85%) and support with assessment and decision-making (122/140, 87%). CONCLUSIONS: Users' satisfaction with teleguidance surpassed their initial expectations, mainly through contribution to nontechnical aspects of performance, and through help with general assessment. Teleguidance shows the potential to improve performance and outcomes during ERCP. However, it takes hands-on experience for practitioners to understand how the new telemedicine service contributes to performance and outcomes.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,028
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,980

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,097
Tête enseignante GPT0,410
Écart entre enseignants0,313 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Human FactorsMême sujetTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTravaux en français237 207