Orthopaedic and trauma surgeons’ prioritisation of app quality principles based on their demographic background

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Research

David Alexander Back¹  Florian Dittrich²  Ute von Jan³  Christin Malinka³  Urs-Vito Albrecht⁴  Jörg Ansorg⁵ 

[1] Department for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Bundeswehr Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany;Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany;Joint Centre Bergischland, Sana Fabricius Clinic Remscheid, Remscheid, Germany;Department of Digital Medicine, Medical Faculty OWL, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany;Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics of TU Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany;Peter L. Reichertz Institute for Medical Informatics of TU Braunschweig and Hannover Medical School, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany;Department of Digital Medicine, Medical Faculty OWL, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany;Professional Association of Specialists in Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Berlin, Germany;

关键词: Mobile health apps;    Quality principles;    Kano survey;    Prioritisation;    Orthopaedics and trauma surgery;    Physicians;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12891-023-06226-y

 received in 2021-12-21, accepted in 2022-10-17,  发布年份 2022

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundAlthough apps are becoming increasingly relevant in healthcare, there is limited knowledge about how healthcare professionals perceive “quality” in this context and how quality principles that can aid them in assessing health-related apps may be prioritised.The objective was to investigate physicians’ views of predefined (general) quality principles for health apps and to determine whether a ranking algorithm applied to the acquired data can provide stable results against various demographic influences and may thus be appropriate for prioritisation.MethodsParticipants of an online survey of members of two German professional orthopaedics associations conducted between 02/12/2019 and 02/01/2020 were asked about their perception of a set of quality principles for health apps (i.e., “practicality,” “risk adequacy,” “ethical soundness,” “legal conformity,” “content validity,” “technical adequacy,” “usability,” “resource efficiency,” and “transparency”). Structured as a Kano survey, for each principle, there were questions about its perceived relevance and opinions regarding the presence or absence of corresponding characteristics. The available data were evaluated descriptively, and a newly developed method for prioritisation of the principles was applied overall and to different demographic strata (for validation).ResultsThree hundred eighty-two datasets from 9503 participants were evaluated. Legal conformity, content validity, and risk adequacy filled ranks one to three, followed by practicability, ethical soundness, and usability (ranks 4 to 6). Technical adequacy, transparency, and resource efficiency ranked last (ranks 7 to 9). The ranking based on the proposed method was relatively stable, irrespective of demographic factors. The principles were seen as essential, with one exception (“resource efficiency”). Only those with little to no interest in digitisation (22/382, 5.8%) rated the nine principles indifferently.ConclusionsThe specified quality principles and their prioritisation can lay a foundation for future assessments of apps in the medical field. Professional societies build upon this to highlight opportunities for digital transformations in medicine and encourage their members to participate.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s) 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 5

Fig. 8

Fig. 7

Fig. 2