End-user assessment of an innovative clothing-based sensor developed for pressure injury prevention: a mixed-method study

• Autor(a) principal: Rêgo, Anderson S.
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: Filipe, Luísa, Dias, Rosana A., Alves, Filipe S., Queiroz, José, Ainla, Alar, Arruda, Luísa M., Fangueiro, Raúl, Bouçanova, Maria, Bernardes, Rafael A., de Sousa, Liliana B., Santos-Costa, Paulo, Apóstolo, João A., Parreira, Pedro, Salgueiro-Oliveira, Anabela
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: https://hdl.handle.net/1822/86724
• topic: Biomedical technology assessment; Wearable electronic devices; Protective clothing; Pressure injury; Mobility limitation; Bedridden persons

This study aimed to evaluate a clothing prototype that incorporates sensors for the evaluation of pressure, temperature, and humidity for the prevention of pressure injuries, namely regarding physical and comfort requirements. A mixed-method approach was used with concurrent quantitative and qualitative data triangulation. A structured questionnaire was applied before a focus group of experts to evaluate the sensor prototypes. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics and the discourse of the collective subject, followed by method integration and meta-inferences. Nine nurses, experts in this topic, aged 32.66 ± 6.28 years and with a time of profession of 10.88 ± 6.19 years, participated in the study. Prototype A presented low evaluation in stiffness (1.56 ± 1.01) and roughness (2.11 ± 1.17). Prototype B showed smaller values in dimension (2.77 ± 0.83) and stiffness (3.00 ± 1.22). Embroidery was assessed as inadequate in terms of stiffness (1.88 ± 1.05) and roughness (2.44 ± 1.01). The results from the questionnaires and focus groups’ show low adequacy as to stiffness, roughness, and comfort. The participants highlighted the need for improvements regarding stiffness and comfort, suggesting new proposals for the development of sensors for clothing. The main conclusions are that Prototype A presented the lowest average scores relative to rigidity (1.56 ± 1.01), considered inadequate. This dimension of Prototype B was evaluated as slightly adequate (2.77 ± 0.83). The rigidity (1.88 ± 1.05) of Prototype A + B + embroidery was evaluated as inadequate. The prototype revealed clothing sensors with low adequacy regarding the physical requirements, such as stiffness or roughness. Improvements are needed regarding the stiffness and roughness for the safety and comfort characteristics of the device evaluated.