How to interact with medical terminologies? Formative usability evaluations comparing three approaches for supporting the use of MedDRA by pharmacovigilance specialists

Background: Medical terminologies are commonly used in medicine. For instance, to answer a pharmacovigilance question, pharmacovigilance specialists (PVS) search in a pharmacovigilance database for reports in relation to a given drug. To do that, they first need to identify all MedDRA terms that might have been used to code an adverse reaction in the database, but terms may be numerous and difficult to select as they may belong to different parts of the hierarchy. In previous studies, three tools have been developed to help PVS identify and group all relevant MedDRA terms using three different approaches: forms, structured query-builder, and icons. Yet, a poor usability of the tools may increase PVS' workload and reduce their performance. This study aims to evaluate, compare and improve the three tools during two rounds of formative usability evaluation. Methods: First, a cognitive walkthrough was performed. Based on the design recommendations obtained from this evaluation, designers made modifications to their tools to improve usability. Once this re-engineering phase completed, six PVS took part in a usability test: difficulties, errors and verbalizations during their interaction with the three tools were collected. Their satisfaction was measured through the System Usability Scale. The design recommendations issued from the tests were used to adapt the tools. Results: All tools had usability problems related to the lack of guidance in the graphical user interface (e.g., unintuitive labels). In two tools, the use of the SNOMED CT to find MedDRA terms hampered their use because French PVS were not used to it. For the most obvious and common terms, the icons-based interface would appear to be more useful. For the less frequently used MedDRA terms or those distributed in different parts of the hierarchy, the structured query-builder would be preferable thanks to its great power and flexibility. The form-based tool seems to be a compromise. Conclusion: These evaluations made it possible to identify the strengths of each tool but also their weaknesses to address them before further evaluation. Next step is to assess the acceptability of tools and the expressiveness of their results to help identify and group MedDRA terms

Home-based exercise in autoimmune myasthenia gravis: A randomized controlled trial

International audienceThe tolerance of exercise and its effects on quality of life in myasthenia gravis are not currently backed up by strong evidence. The aim of this study was to determine whether exercise as an adjunct therapy is well tolerated and can improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in stabilized, generalized autoimmune myasthenia gravis (gMG). We conducted a parallel-group, multi-center prospective RCT using computer-generated block randomization. Adults with stabilized, gMG, and no contra-indication to exercise, were eligible. Participants received usual care alone or usual care and exercise. The exercise intervention consisted of 3-weekly 40 min sessions of an unsupervised, moderate-intensity home rowing program over 3 months. The primary endpoint was the change in HRQoL from randomization to postintervention. Assessor-blinded secondary endpoints were exercise tolerance and effects on clinical, psychological and immunological status. Of 138 patients screened between October 2014 and July 2017, 45 were randomly assigned to exercise (n = 23) or usual care (n = 20). Although exercise was well tolerated, the intention-to-treat analysis revealed no evidence of improved HRQoL compared to usual care (MGQOL-15-F; mean adjusted between-groups difference of-0.8 points, 95%CI-5.4 to 3.7). Two patients hospitalized for MG exacerbation were from the usual care group