skip to main content
10.1145/3625156.3625195acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicissConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Scoping Review on Lead User Engagement Methods in the Development of Telemedicine Products

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 November 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

There has been a major increase in the development of new telemedicine products post the Covid-19 pandemic. The need for these products continues to rise due to the expansion of the ageing population and the desire to have robust health systems that can cater to large populations. However, the success of these telemedicine products largely depends on their acceptance by users. The acceptance rate of products is arguably directly proportional to meeting user needs, ease of use and user comfortability to adopt the product. The latter is affected mainly by a large population expecting a walk-in service for medical attention, hence sidelining telemedicine products. A larger part of the world population does not yet trust the effectiveness of telemedicine products. To improve the adoption of these products, users need to be involved in their development. This increases the ability of products to meet end-user needs, hence their adoption. In this paper, we focus on how we can involve lead users in healthcare in developing telemedicine products. We termed these as "engagement methods". The aim is to highlight different engagement methods that can be used in different telemedicine product development scenarios. The results of this study help developers in the selection of an effective engagement method per development stage. Selecting the proper engagement method enables developers to utilise the lead user expertise in telemedicine product development fully. We also used content coding to identify the research gaps in the literature and postulate possible avenues for future engagement methods in new product development (NPD) in telemedicine. The research followed a structured literature review through the PRISMA protocol. The search strategy included analysing published articles from prior health research. Articles were retrieved from three (3) databases: Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed. Titles, abstracts and full texts of retrieved articles were screened for relevance and duplication. Inclusion was limited to health research articles that report on lead user involvement at least at one stage in new product development. The study provides scholars and practitioners with original and valuable contributions to the present literature on engagement methods in telemedicine product development.

References

  1. V Bilgram, A Brem and K I Voigt. 2008. User-centric innovations in new product development – systematic identification of lead users harnessing interactive and collaborative online tools. Managing Innovation: Understanding and Motivations Crowds, volume 12, number 3, page 173-212. doi 10.1142/9781781786346490_0007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. C Hienerth and C Lettl. 2017. Perspective: Understanding the Nature and Measurement of the Lead User Construct. Journal of Product Innovation Management, volume 34, number 1, page 3-12, doi: 10.1111/jpim.12318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. C Nielsen, H Agerskov, C Bistrup and J Clemensen. 2020. User involvement in the development of a telehealth solution to improve the kidney transplantation process: A participatory design study. Health Informatics Journal, volume 26, number 2, page 1237 – 1252. doi: 10.1177/1460458219876188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. C Karamanidou, C Maramis, K Stamatopoulos and V Koutkias. 2020. Development of a epro-based palliative care intervention for cancer patients: A participatory design approach. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, IOS Press, page 941 -945. doi: 10.3233/SHT1200300.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. A Chavez, G Borrego, J O Gutierrez-Garcia and L F Rodriguez. 2019. Design and evaluation of a mobile application for monitoring patients with Alzheimer's disease: A day center case study, International Journal Medical Informatics, volume 131. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.103972.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. S Marien. 2019. A user-centered design and usability testing of a web-based medication reconciliation application integrated in an eHealth network. International Journal Medical Informatics, volume 123, pages 138 – 146. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.03.0313.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. B Smaradottir, M Gerdes and R Fensli. 2015. Usability Evaluation of a COPD Remote Monitoring Application, number 1. doi: 10.3233/978-1-61499-512-8-845.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. N Weinberger. 2021. A New Method for Structured Integration of User Needs in Two Health Technology Development Projects: Action Sheets A New Method for Structured Integration of User Needs in Two Health Technology Development Projects: Action Sheets. Informatics Health Social Care, volume 46, number 2, page 113 – 125. Doi: 10.1080/17538157.2020.1865968.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. M Elg, J Engstrom, L Witell and B Poksinska. 2012. Co-creation and learning in health-care service development. Journal of Service Management, volume 23, number 3, page 328 -343. doi: 10.1108/09564231211248435.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. N Oravec. 2022. Protocol for scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews. Research Involvement Engagement, volume 8, number 1, pages 1 – 9. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00361-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. W Brown, P Yen, M Rojas and R Schnall. 2013. Assessment of the Health IT Usability Evaluation Model (Health-ITUEM) for evaluating mobile health (mhealth) technology. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, volume 46, number 6, pages 1080 – 1087. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2013.08.001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. M A Jahn, A L Russ, B W Porter, and S R Simon. 2018. Usability Assessment of Secure Messaging for Clinical Document Sharing between Health Care Providers and Patients.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. P Lehoux, F A Miller, M Hivon, O Demers-Payette and D R Urbach. 2013. Clinicians as health technology designers: Two contrasting tales about user involvement in innovation development. Health Policy Technology, volume 2, number 3, pages 122-130. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2013.05.003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. M J Lazaro, I Program and S National. 2012. Mobile Health Application for Seizure Management: A Human-Systems Integration Approach. Human Factors. doi: 10.1177/00187208221074427.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. T Tang, M E Lim, E Mansfield, A McLachlan and S D Quan. 2018. Clinician user involvement in the real world: Designing an electronic tool to improve interprofessional communication and collaboration in a hospital setting. International Journal of Medical Informatics, volume 110, pages 90-97. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.11.011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Y Dong, K Wang, S Zhu, W Li and P Yang. 2021. Design and development of an intelligent skipping rope and service system for pupils. Healthcare (Switzerland), volume 9. doi: 10.3390/healthcare9080954.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. O N Mgbemena, I Sears and B Levine. 2021. Augmenting Traditional Cardiac and Medical Care in Africa via Telemedicine: A Pilot Study. doi: 10.7759/cureus.17483.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. G L Urban and E Von Hippel. 1988. Lead User Analyses for the Development of New Industrial Products.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. E Von Hippel. 1986. Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. M D Williams. 2021. Frontline nurse feedback during the development of a system to track cleaning of portable medical equipment. Computers Informatics Nursing, volume 39, number 12, pages 1035-1040. Doi: 10.1097/CIN.00000000000754.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. L Knox. 2021. Using the Technology Acceptance Model to conceptualise experiences of the usability and acceptability of a self-management app (COPD Pal) for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Health Technology, pages 111-117. doi: 10.1007/s12553-020-00494-7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. M Dirin. 2015. User-Centered Design of a Context-Aware Nurse Assistant (CANA) at Finnish Elderly Houses.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. A M Bielinska, S Archer, A Darzi and C Urch. 2022. Co-designing an intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in later life following emergency hospitalization: A research protocol using accelerated experience-based co-design (AEBCD) and the behaviour change wheel (BCW), BMJ Open, volume 12, number 5. Doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055347.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. A Das and D Svanaes. 2013. Human-centered methods in the design of an e-health solution for patients undergoing weight loss treatment. International Journal in Medical Informatics, volume 82, number 11.Doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.06.008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. K Easton, S Potter, R. Bec, and M. Bennion. 2019. A Virtual Agent to Support Individuals Living With Physical and Mental Comorbidities: Co-Design and Acceptability Testing. Volume. 21. Doi: 10.2196/12996Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. K. Edwards, J. Thommesen, O. Broberg, J. Nielsen, A. Alapetite, and H. Boje. 2012. Using explorative simulation to drive user-centered design and IT-development in healthcare, 11th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference and the Annual European Safety and Reliability Conference 2012, PSAM11 ESREL 2012, volume. 7, pages. 6006–6010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. A Stålberg, A Sandberg, M Söderbäck, and T Larsson. 2016. The child's perspective as a guiding principle: Young children as co-designers in the design of an interactive application meant to facilitate participation in healthcare situations. Journal in Biomedical Informatics, volume 61, pages 149–158. Doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2016.03.024.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. C O'Grady, R Melia, J Bogue, M O'Sullivan, K Young and J Duggan. 2020. A mobile health approach for improving outcomes in suicide prevention (SafePlan). Journal Medical Internet Research, volume 22, number. 7. Doi: 10.2196/17481.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. K Lawrence, J Cho, C Torres, and V Alfaro-arias. 2022. Building Virtual Health Training Tools for Residents: A Design Thinking Approach, Front Digit Health. Doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2022.861579.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. E Borosund. 2018. A stress management app intervention for cancer survivors: Design, development, and usability testing. Journal of Medical Internet Research, volume 2, number. 2. Doi: 10.2196/formative.9954.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. A Grynne, M Browall, S Fristedt, K Ahlberg, and F Smith. 2021. Integrating perspectives of patients, healthcare professionals, system developers and academics in the co-design of a digital information tool, PLoS One, volume 16, number 7. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253448.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. M A Boateng, E Agyei-Baffour, S Angel, O Asare, B Prempeh, and U Enemark. 2021. Co-creation and prototyping of an intervention focusing on health literacy in management of malaria at community-level in Ghana. Research Involvement Engagement, volume 7, number 1. Doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00302-0.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. K Krmpotic, J R Gallant, K Zufelt, and C Zuijdwijk. 2022. User-centred development of an mHealth app for youth with type 1 diabetes: the challenge of operationalizing desired features and feasibility of offering financial incentives, Health Technology (Berl), pages. 499–513. Doi: 10.1007/s12553-022-00656-9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. C H Saunders. 2022. Co-Development of a Web Application ( COVID-19 Social Site ) for Long-Term Care Workers (‘ Something for Us ’): User-Centered Design and Participatory Research Study, volume 24, pages. 1–13. Doi: 10.2196/38359.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. K Joensson. 2019. Listening to the patients: using participatory design in the development of a cardiac telerehabilitation web portal. Mhealth, volume 5, pages. 33–33. Doi: 10.21037/mhealth.2019.08.06.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. U Backonja, L Taylor-Swanson, A D. Miller, S H Jung, S Haldar, and N F Woods. 2021. There's a problem, now what's the solution?: Suggestions for technologies to support the menopausal transition from individuals experiencing menopause and healthcare practitioners, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, volume 28, number. 2, pages. 209–221. Doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. D Panatto, A Domnich, R Gasparini, P Bonanni, G Icardi, and D Amicizia. 2016. Development and preliminary data on the use of a mobile app specifically designed to increase community awareness of invasive pneumococcal disease and its prevention, Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics, volume 12, number 4, pages 1080–1084. Doi: 10.1080/21645515.2015.1114196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. M C M Lin, T H Kim, W S Kim, I Hakanson, A Hussein, and L Hung. 2022. Involvement of frontline clinicians in healthcare technology development: Lessons learned from a ventilator project. Health Technology (Berl), volume 12, number 2, pages. 597–606. Doi: 10.1007/s12553-022-00655-w.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. H S Park. 2021. A worker-centered personal health record app for workplace health promotion using national health care data sets: Design and development study, Journal Medical Internet Research and Medical Informatics, volume 9, number 8. Doi: 10.2196/29184.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. D D Vaziri. 2016. Exploring user experience and technology acceptance for a fall prevention system: results from a randomized clinical trial and a living lab, European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, volume 13, number. 1. Doi: 10.1186/s11556-016-0165-z.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. M Sivan. 2016. Employing the International Classification of Functioning , Disability and Health framework to capture user feedback in the design and testing stage of development of home-based arm rehabilitation technology Employing the International Classification of Assistive Technology, volume 28, number 3, pages 175–182. Doi: 10.1080/10400435.2016.1140689.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. J Rybing, E Prytz, J Hornwall, H Nilsson, C O. Jonson, and M Bang. 2017. Designing a Digital Medical Management Training Simulator Using Distributed Cognition Theory, Simulation Gaming, volume 48, number 1, pages 131–152, 2017. Doi: 10.1177/1046878116676511.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. J Bjerkan, M Hedlund, and R Helleso. 2015. Patients’ contribution to the development of a web-based plan for integrated care-A participatory design study, Informatics for Health and Social Care, volume 40, number 2, pages 167–184. Doi: 10.3109/17538157.2014.907803.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. M L Gilliam, S L Martins, E Bartlett, S Q Mistretta, and J L Holl. 2014. Development and testing of an iOS waiting room ‘app’ for contraceptive counseling in a Title X family planning clinic, American Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology, volume 211, number 5. Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.05.034.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. A Abdulaal, A Patel, A Al-hindawi, S A Alqahtani, G W. Davies, and N Mughal. 2021. Clinical Utility and Functionality of an Artificial Intelligence – Based App to Predict Mortality in COVID-19: Mixed Methods Analysis, Volume 5, number 7, 2021. Doi: 10.2196/27992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. V Baric, M Andreassen, A Öhman, and H Hemmingsson. 2019. Using an interactive digital calendar with mobile phone reminders by senior people - A focus group study, BMC Geriatrics, volume 19, number. 1. Doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1128-9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. M A Jahn, B W Porter, H Patel, A J Zillich, S R. Simon, and A L Russ. 2018. Usability Assessment of Secure Messaging for Clinical Document Sharing between Health Care Providers and Patients, Applied Clinical Informatics Journal, volume 9, number 2, pages 467–477. Doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1660521.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Y Kerkhof, M Pelgrum-keurhorst, F Mangiaracina, A Bergsma, G Vrauwdeunt, and M Graff. 2019. User-participatory development of FindMyApps ; a tool to help people with mild dementia find supportive apps for self-management and meaningful activities, volume 5, pages 1–19. Doi: 10.1177/2055207618822942.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. J L Doty. 2020. Designing a Mobile App to Enhance Parenting Skills of Latinx Parents: A Community-Based Participatory Approach, volume 4, number 1. Doi: 10.2196/12618.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. E Gong. 2018. System-integrated technology-enabled model of care to improve the health of stroke patients in rural China: protocol for SINEMA—a cluster-randomized controlled trial, American Heart Journal, volume 207, pages 27–39. Doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.08.015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. K Ludlow. 2021. Co-designing a dashboard of predictive analytics and decision support to drive care quality and client outcomes in aged care: A mixed-method study protocol, BMJ Open, volume11, number 8. Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048657.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. N T Jiam. 2017. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology IIAM ( important information about me ): a patient portability profile app for adults , children and families with neurodevelopmental disabilities. Doi: 10.1080/17483107.2016.1198435.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Scoping Review on Lead User Engagement Methods in the Development of Telemedicine Products

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ICISS '23: Proceedings of the 2023 6th International Conference on Information Science and Systems
        August 2023
        301 pages
        ISBN:9798400708206
        DOI:10.1145/3625156

        Copyright © 2023 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 21 November 2023

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)28
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format