Usability of MASK-air® App

• Autor(a) principal: Peixoto, Ricardo Manuel Lopes da Silva
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.6/13543
• topic: Asma; Mars; Mask-Air®; Rinite Alérgica; Domínio/Área Científica::Ciências Médicas::Ciências da Saúde::Medicina

Introduction: Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis are common chronic respiratory diseases that often coexist and pose a significant economic burden. The use of mobile health (mHealth) Apps can help address this challenge by providing patients and healthcare providers with tools for better prevention and self-management of respiratory allergic diseases. However, the development and testing of these Apps in formal research settings contrast with consumers’ widespread adoption and usage. Moreover, the design elements of these Apps can affect whether users persist in using them for sustained behavioral change over time. Objectives: Our objective was to assess the usability of the MASK-air® App using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) in a population of Portuguese community pharmacists and a population of patients with Allergic Rhinitis and/or Asthma. Materials and Methods: This observational cross-sectional study involved two population samples. Community pharmacists were recruited during an allergic rhinitis workshop held at the Faculty of Health Sciences. They were informed about the project, trained to use the MASK-air® App, and evaluated the App using the MARS evaluation scale. Patients with allergic rhinitis were recruited by participating community pharmacists and evaluated the App using the uMARS evaluation scale. After seven days of daily use, patients repeated their evaluation. Results: Regarding the evaluation of the App objective quality, the pharmacists gave the highest score to “Functionality” with a mean score of 4.5 ± 0.5, while the lowest score was given to “Information” with a mean score of 3.9 ± 0.7. Similarly, the patients rated “Functionality” as the highest quality dimension, with a mean score of 4.2 ± 0.7, and “Engagement” as the lowest, with a mean score of 3.7 ± 0.5. Regarding the subjective App quality classification, when compared to the patients, the participating pharmacists gave a better subjective quality classification to the App, with a mean score of 3.2 ± 0.47 compared to 3.07 ± 0.6 for patients. Concerning the perceived health impact of the App, the pharmacists gave the highest score to “Awareness” with a mean score of 3.9 ± 0.6, while the lowest score was given to “Knowledge” with a mean score of 3.6 ± 0.7. The patients obtained the highest score for “Awareness” with a mean score of 3.5 ± 0.6, while “Knowledge”, “Attitudes” and “Help-seeking” received similar lower scores with a mean of 3.3 ± 0.9. After seven days of daily use, the patients reevaluated the App and the only statistically significant differences were observed in the “Help-seeking” and “App-Specific Global Evaluation” items. It was also found that female pharmacists attributed significantly higher median classification scores than male pharmacists, particularly in the App quality dimensions of “Engagement” (p-value<0.01), “Aesthetics” (p-value<0.05), and “Global App Quality” (pvalue<0.01). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that the evaluated mobile health app showed promising potential for improving patient outcomes. Both patients and pharmacists attributed the highest scores to the "Functionality" dimension, indicating the importance of having a well-designed and functional App. However, there were differences in the subjective quality classification between patients and pharmacists, with pharmacists rating the app higher. This suggests that while patients may benefit from the App, pharmacists may have a higher expectation of the app's quality. Moreover, the App demonstrated a positive impact on the patients' perceived health outcomes, particularly in terms of increasing their awareness of their health condition. However, there were some limitations to the study, such as the small sample size and the lack of long-term evaluation. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods could provide more robust evidence of the App's effectiveness. In summary, this study highlights the of mobile health Apps to improve healthcare delivery and outcomes. It also emphasizes the importance of involving healthcare professionals in developing and evaluating such Apps, as their perspective can provide valuable insights into the App's quality and potential impact on patient care.