PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Methods Inf Med 2020; 59(S 02): e79-e89
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1713086
Original Article for a Focus Theme

Usability Evaluation of a Distributed User Interface Application for Visuomotor Organization Assessment

Cristian Cuerda
1   Universidad de Castilla—La Mancha, Albacete, Spain
,
Dulce Romero-Ayuso
2   Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
,
Jose A. Gallud
1   Universidad de Castilla—La Mancha, Albacete, Spain
,
Carmen Morales
2   Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
,
Ricardo Tesoriero
1   Universidad de Castilla—La Mancha, Albacete, Spain
,
Jose-Matias Triviño-Juarez
3   Primary Care Center Zaidin Sur, Andalusian Health Service, Granada, Spain
,
Habib M. Fardoun
4   Ahlia University, Ahlia, Bahrain
› Institutsangaben Funding This research has been partially supported by the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (Spain) under grant RTI2018–099942-B-I00. This work has been supported by the fellowship 2019/451 from the University of Castilla-La Mancha.
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background This article describes the development and evaluation of a distributed user interface (DUI) application to assess visuomotor organization ability. This application enables therapists to evaluate the acquired brain injury (ABI) on patients, and patients, to perform the assessment on a touch screen while therapists can observe the assessment process in real time on a separated monitor without interfering patients during the process as in traditional methodologies employing physical elements.

Objectives The main goal of this research is the evaluation of the quality in use of DUIs in the Pegboard Construction assessment with patients with ABI from the therapist perspective in the area of occupational therapy.

Methods To evaluate our system, we have performed a usability evaluation following the ISO/IEC 25010 and ISO/IEC 25062 standards to evaluate software usability and quality and it was conducted in collaboration with therapists and psychologists that have previously worked with people with ABI in diagnostic and assessment tasks.

Results We show the results of the evaluation collected in a table that shows the completeness rate for each user for both, assisted (i.e., the percentage of tasks where participants performed with test director assistance) and unassisted tasks (i.e., the percentage of tasks where participants completed tasks autonomously), the total time participants required to complete proposed tasks, the number of mistakes participants performed during the session, and the number of assists they required to finish proposed tasks. In addition, we also evaluated the user satisfaction regarding our application using the system usability scale.

Conclusion The use of information technologies in this field enables therapists to perform these evaluations in a simpler, efficient, and automated way. This proposal enables patients to perform the assessment as it is performed traditionally using paper providing them with a touch screen in which they can easily insert a set of pins into the holes. The usability evaluation of the proposal meets the appropriate design standards for applications of this type, and this is demonstrated by the high degree of satisfaction of the participants.

Keywords

cognition - assessment - occupational therapy - acquired brain injury - distributed user interface


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 05. November 2019

Angenommen: 02. März 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
07. September 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Navarra ACIA. Available at: https://www.adacen.org/blog/index.php/que-esel-dano-cerebral-y-cuales-son-sus-secuelas/ . Accessed November 9, 2018
  • 2 Cerebral Injury HHRM. Available at: http://xn–daocerebral-2db.es/papelde-la-terapia-ocupacional-en-la-rehabilitacion-del-dano-cerebral/ . Accessed November 12, 2018
  • 3 Katz N, Itzkovich M, Averbuch S, Elazar B. Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (LOTCA) battery for brain-injured patients: reliability and validity. Am J Occup Ther 1989; 43 (03) 184-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 McDermott A. Purpose of measure. In: Nicol Korner-Bitensky, ed. Loewenstein Occupational Theraphy Cognitive Assessment. Ottawa: Heart and Stroke Foundation; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Annes GCS. Comparison of younger and older healthy American adults on the Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment. Occup Ther Int 1996; 3: 157-173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Zwecker M, Levenkrohn S, Fleisig Y, Zeilig G, Ohry A, Adunsky A. Mini-mental state examination, cognitive FIM instrument, and the Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment: relation to functional outcome of stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83 (03) 342-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Jang Y, Chern JS, Lin KC. Validity of the Loewenstein occupational therapy cognitive assessment in people with intellectual disabilities. Am J Occup Ther 2009; 63 (04) 414-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Josman N, Katz N. Relationships of categorization on tests and daily tasks in patients with schizophrenia, post-stroke patients and healthy controls. Psychiatry Res 2006; 141 (01) 15-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Josman N, Abdallah TM, Engel-Yeger B. Cultural factors affecting the differential performance of Israeli and Palestinian children on the Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment. Res Dev Disabil 2010; 31 (03) 656-663
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cermak SA, Katz N, McGuire E, Greenbaum S, Peralta C, Maser-Flanagan V. Performance of Americans and Israelis with cerebrovascular accident on the Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (LOTCA). Am J Occup Ther 1995; 49 (06) 500-506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Katz N, Champagne D, Cermak S. Comparison of the performance of younger and older adults on three versions of a puzzle reproduction task. Am J Occup Ther 1997; 51 (07) 562-568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Melchior J, Vanderdonckt J, Van Roy P. A model-based approach for distributed user interfaces. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems. Pisa, Italy; 2011: 11-20
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Penãlver A, L'opez-Esp'ın JJ, Gallud JA, Lazcorreta E, Botella F. Distributed User Interfaces: Specification of Essential Properties in Distributed User Interfaces. Designing Interfaces for the Distributed Ecosystem. London: Springer; 2011: 13-21
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Tesoriero R, Altalhi AH. Model-based development of distributable user interfaces. Univ Access Inf Soc 2019; 18: 719-746
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Villanueva PG, Tesoriero R, Gallud JA. Revisiting the concept of distributed user interfaces. 2013: 1-15 . DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4471-5499-0_1
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Elmqvist N. Distributed user interfaces: state of the art. Paper presented at: Workshop on Distributed User Interfaces 2011 (DUI) at the 29th ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; May 7, 2011; Vancouver
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Vandervelpen C, Vanderhulst K, Coninx K. Light-weight distributed web interfaces: preparing the web for heterogeneous environments. Paper presented at: Proceeding of 5th Int. Conf. on Web Engineering ICWE'2005. Sydney, Australia; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Grolaux D, Roy PV, Vanderdonckt J. Migratable user interfaces: beyond migratory interfaces. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems; August, 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Bandelloni F. Flexible interface migration. Paper presented at: the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces; January, 2004. Boston, Massachusetts, United States; Funchal
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Demeure J, Sottet S, Calvary G, Coutaz V, Vanderdonckt J. The 4C reference model for distributed user interfaces. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems; 2008; NW Washington, DC
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Melchior J, Grolaux D, Vanderdonckt J, Roy PV. A toolkit for peer-to-peer distributed user interfaces: concepts, implementation, and applications. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing System; July, 2009; Pittsburgh, PA
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Penichet VMR, Lozano MD, Gallud JA, Tesoriero R. 12+1 Questions in the Design of Distributed User Interfaces. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on Distributed User Interfaces and Multimodal Interaction; July 1, 2014; Toulouse
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Gallud JA, Penichet VMR. Distributed user interfaces: distributing interactions to facilitate universal access. Univ Access Inf Soc 2019; 18 (04) 717-718
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Marco FA, Gallud JA, Penichet VMR. A study on how users perceive distributed interactions on web applications. IEEE Access 2018; 6: 57389-57399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Mayhew DJ. The Usability Engineering Lifecycle: A Practitioner's Handbook for User Interface Design. San Francisco; CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Collazos CA, Gil R. Using cross-cultural features in web design patterns. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 2011 Eighth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations (USA) IEEE Computer Society. Las Vegas, Nevada, United States; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Llu'cia Masip RG, Granollers T, Collazos CA. Multiculturality and internationalization in Web interfaces. Rev Adv Sistemas Inform 2009; 6: 192-196
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 ISO/IEC 25010. 2011 Systems and software engineering—Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) —systems and software quality models; 2013
  • 29 Software Engineering—Software Product-Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuarE)—Common Industry Format (CIF) for Usability Test Reports. International Organization for Standardization; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Brooke J. SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Usability Evaluation in Industry. CRC Press; 1996: 189-194
    Google Scholar