Exploring the Equity Impact of Current Digital Health Design Practices:Protocol for a Scoping Review

BACKGROUND: The field of digital health has grown rapidly in part due to digital health tools’ potential to reduce health inequities. However, such potential has not always been realized. The design approaches used in digital health are one of the known aspects that have an impact on health equity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our scoping review will be to understand how design approaches in digital health have an impact on health equity. METHODS: A scoping review of studies that describe how design practices for digital health have an impact on health equity will be carried out. The scoping review will follow the methodologies laid out by Arksey and O’Malley, the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and ACM Digital Library databases will be searched for peer-reviewed papers. The ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and Global Index Medicus databases will be searched for gray literature. The results will be screened against our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, the data extracted from the included studies will be analyzed. RESULTS: As of March 2022, a preliminary search of the peer-reviewed databases has yielded over 4900 studies, and more are anticipated when gray literature databases are searched. We expect that after duplicates are removed and screening is completed, a much smaller number of studies will meet all of our inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Although there has been much discussion about the importance of design for lowering barriers to digital health participation, the evidence base demonstrating its impacts on health equity is less obvious. We hope that our findings will contribute to a better understanding of the impact that design in digital health has on health equity and that these findings will translate into action that leads to stronger, more equitable health care systems

[Changing] Communities

Designing with and for communities is a broad and multifaceted topic. In this introductory paper to the track Changing Communities, we discuss a series of studies that employed collaborative processes to tackle urgent public interest issues while empowering communities at the same time. A variety of themes emerged: one main transversal area is about cocreation and co-design methodologies that have demonstrated to have a transformative potential in addressing complex societal challenges. Another theme is about social innovation, considered both as the process of change of social practices and as the outcomes in terms of new products, services and policies. In particular healthcare arose as one of the main application fields of numerous papers, being discussed in different contexts such as medical device design, healthcare service design, health information systems and others. In addition, there was an area addressed by some papers that was about how to take care of the commons, tackling issues related to public space, placemaking and collective heritage, to mention a few. The studies of this track have illuminated the way forward, emphasising collaboration, empathy, and community empowerment as cornerstones of design practices that shape a more inclusive, sustainable, and innovative future

A Remote Patient-Monitoring System for Intensive Care Medicine: Mixed Methods Human-Centered Design and Usability Evaluation

Background: Continuous monitoring of vital signs is critical for ensuring patient safety in intensive care units (ICUs) and is becoming increasingly relevant in general wards. The effectiveness of health information technologies such as patient-monitoring systems is highly determined by usability, the lack of which can ultimately compromise patient safety. Usability problems can be identified and prevented by involving users (ie, clinicians). Objective: In this study, we aim to apply a human-centered design approach to evaluate the usability of a remote patient-monitoring system user interface (UI) in the ICU context and conceptualize and evaluate design changes. Methods: Following institutional review board approval (EA1/031/18), a formative evaluation of the monitoring UI was performed. Simulated use tests with think-aloud protocols were conducted with ICU staff (n=5), and the resulting qualitative data were analyzed using a deductive analytic approach. On the basis of the identified usability problems, we conceptualized informed design changes and applied them to develop an improved prototype of the monitoring UI. Comparing the UIs, we evaluated perceived usability using the System Usability Scale, performance efficiency with the normative path deviation, and effectiveness by measuring the task completion rate (n=5). Measures were tested for statistical significance using a 2-sample t test, Poisson regression with a generalized linear mixed-effects model, and the N-1 chi-square test. P<.05 were considered significant. Results: We found 37 individual usability problems specific to monitoring UI, which could be assigned to six subcodes: usefulness of the system, response time, responsiveness, meaning of labels, function of UI elements, and navigation. Among user ideas and requirements for the UI were high usability, customizability, and the provision of audible alarm notifications. Changes in graphics and design were proposed to allow for better navigation, information retrieval, and spatial orientation. The UI was revised by creating a prototype with a more responsive design and changes regarding labeling and UI elements. Statistical analysis showed that perceived usability improved significantly (System Usability Scale design A: mean 68.5, SD 11.26, n=5; design B: mean 89, SD 4.87, n=5; P=.003), as did performance efficiency (normative path deviation design A: mean 8.8, SD 5.26, n=5; design B: mean 3.2, SD 3.03, n=5; P=.001), and effectiveness (design A: 18 trials, failed 7, 39% times, passed 11, 61% times; design B: 20 trials, failed 0 times, passed 20 times; P=.002). Conclusions: Usability testing with think-aloud protocols led to a patient-monitoring UI with significantly improved usability, performance, and effectiveness. In the ICU work environment, difficult-to-use technology may result in detrimental outcomes for staff and patients. Technical devices should be designed to support efficient and effective work processes. Our results suggest that this can be achieved by applying basic human-centered design methods and principles. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03514173; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0351417

Improving facility-based care: eliciting tacit knowledge to advance intervention design

Attention has turned to improving the quality and safety of healthcare within health facilities to reduce avoidable mortality and morbidity. Interventions should be tested in health system environments that can support their adoption if successful. To be successful, interventions often require changes in multiple behaviours making their consequences unpredictable. Here, we focus on this challenge of change at the mesolevel or microlevel. Drawing on multiple insights from theory and our own empirical work, we highlight the importance of engaging managers, senior and frontline staff and potentially patients to explore foundational questions examining three core resource areas. These span the physical or material resources available, workforce capacity and capability and team and organisational relationships. Deficits in all these resource areas may need to be addressed to achieve success. We also argue that as inertia is built into the complex social and human systems characterising healthcare facilities that thought on how to mobilise five motive forces is needed to help achieve change. These span goal alignment and ownership, leadership for change, empowering key actors, promoting responsive planning and procurement and learning for transformation. Our aim is to bridge the theory—practice gap and offer an entry point for practical discussions to elicit the critical tacit and contextual knowledge needed to design interventions. We hope that this may improve the chances that interventions are successful and so contribute to better facility-based care and outcomes while contributing to the development of learning health systems

Using and improving the PHISICC paper-based tools in the health facility laboratories: examples of Human Centered Design taking systems thinking into practice, in Côte d'Ivoire and Nigeria

BackgroundHealth workers in low- and middle-income countries are increasingly demanded to collect more and more data to report them to higher levels of the health information system (HIS), in detriment of useful data for clinical and public health decision-making, potentially compromising the quality of their health care provison. In order to support health workers' decision-making, we engaged with partners in Côte d'Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria in a research project to conceive, design, produce, implement and test paper-based health information tools: the PHISICC tools. Our aim was to understand the use of PHISICC tools by health workers and to improve them based on their feedback.MethodsThe design Health Facility Laboratories (HF Labs) in Côte d'Ivoire and in Nigeria were set up after months of use of PHISICC tools. Activities were structured in three phases or 'sprints' of co-creative research. We used a transdisciplinary approach, including anthropology and Human Centered Design (HCD), observations, shadowing, structured interviews and co-creation.ResultsHealth workers appreciated the standardization of the tools across different health care areas, with a common visual language that optimized use. Several design issues were raised, in terms of formats and contents. They strongly appreciated how the PHISICC registers guided their clinical decision-making and how it facilitated tallying and counting for monthly reporting. However, adherence to new procedures was not universal. The co-creation sessions resulted in modifications to the PHISICC tools of out-patient care and postnatal care.DiscussionAlthough health systems and systemic thinking allowed the teams to embrace complexity, it was the HCD approach that actually produced a shift in researchers' mind-set: from HIS as data management tools to HIS as quality of care instruments. HCD allowed navigating the complexity of health systems interventions due to its capacity to operate change: it not only allowed us to understand how the PHISICC tools were used but also how to further improve them. In the absence of (or even with) an analytical health systems framework, HCD approaches can work in real-life situations for the ideation, testing and implementation of interventions to improve health systems and health status outcomes

Mental Health Information Reporting Assistant (MHIRA)—an open-source software facilitating evidence-based assessment for clinical services

Evidence-based assessment (EBA) in mental health is a critical aspect of improving patient outcomes and addressing the gaps in mental health care. EBA involves the use of psychometric instruments to gather data that can inform clinical decision-making, inform policymakers, and serve as a basis for research and quality management. Despite its potential, EBA is often hindered by barriers such as workload and cost, leading to its underutilization. Regarding low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), the implementation of EBA is recognized as a key strategy to address and close the prevalent mental health treatment gap.To simplify the application of EBA including in LMIC, an international team of researchers and practitioners from Tanzania, Kosovo, Chile, and Switzerland developed the Mental Health Information Reporting Assistant (MHIRA). MHIRA is an open-source electronic health record that streamlines EBA by digitising psychometric instruments and organising patient data in a user-friendly manner. It provides immediate and convenient reports to inform clinical decision-making.The current article provides a comprehensive overview of the features and technical details of MHIRA, as well as insights from four implementation scenarios. The experience gained during the implementations as well as the user-feedback suggests that MHIRA has the potential to be successfully implemented in a variety of clinical contexts and simplify the use of EBA. However, further research is necessary to establish its potential to sustainably transform healthcare services and impact patient outcomes.In conclusion, MHIRA represents an important step in promoting the widespread adoption of EBA in mental health. It offers a promising solution to the barriers that have limited the use of EBA in the past and holds the potential to improve patient outcomes and support the ongoing efforts to address gaps in mental health care

Climate conscious health equity is essential to achieve climate-resilient digital healthcare

This short communication highlights the role of digital health equity in supporting climate-resilient digital healthcare pathways for global communities experiencing the health crisis exacerbated by climate change and environmental degradation. Specifically, to design digital health responsibly to support climate change adaptation as an inclusive, equitable, human-centered process means acknowledging the interconnectedness of human health and the health of the natural environment. In this process, we recommend a more integrated and participatory approach to the dimensions of ecological and environmental determinants of health and ethical representation of diverse and vulnerable voices

Challenges and opportunities in evaluating programmes incorporating human-centred design: lessons learnt from the evaluation of Adolescents 360.

Adolescents 360 (A360) is a four-year initiative (2016-2020) to increase 15-19-year-old girls' use of modern contraception in Nigeria, Ethiopia and Tanzania. The innovative A360 approach is led by human-centred design (HCD), combined with social marketing, developmental neuroscience, public health, sociocultural anthropology and youth engagement 'lenses', and aims to create context-specific, youth-driven solutions that respond to the needs of adolescent girls. The A360 external evaluation includes a process evaluation, quasi-experimental outcome evaluation, and a cost-effectiveness study. We reflect on evaluation opportunities and challenges associated with measuring the application and impact of this novel HCD-led design approach. For the process evaluation, participant observations were key to capturing the depth of the fast-paced, highly-iterative HCD process, and to understand decision-making within the design process. The evaluation team had to be flexible and align closely with the work plan of the implementers. The HCD process meant that key information such as intervention components, settings, and eligible populations were unclear and changed over outcome evaluation and cost-effectiveness protocol development. This resulted in a more time-consuming and resource-intensive study design process. As much time and resources went into the creation of a new design approach, separating one-off "creation" costs versus those costs associated with actually implementing the programme was challenging. Opportunities included the potential to inform programmatic decision-making in real-time to ensure that interventions adequately met the contextualized needs in targeted areas. Robust evaluation of interventions designed using HCD, a promising and increasingly popular approach, is warranted yet challenging. Future HCD-based initiatives should consider a phased evaluation, focusing initially on programme theory refinement and process evaluation, and then, when the intervention program details are clearer, following with outcome evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. A phased approach would delay the availability of evaluation findings but would allow for a more appropriate and tailored evaluation design