Evaluating the Usability of an mHealth App for Empowering Cancer Survivors With Disabilities: Heuristic Evaluation and Usability Testing.

BACKGROUND: More than 18 million cancer survivors are living in the United States. The effects of cancer and its treatments can have cognitive, psychological, physical, and social consequences that many survivors find incredibly disabling. Posttreatment support is often unavailable or underused, especially for survivors living with disabilities. This leaves them to deal with new obstacles and struggles on their own, oftentimes feeling lost during this transition. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have been shown to effectively aid cancer survivors in dealing with many of the aftereffects of cancer and its treatments; these interventions hold immense potential for survivors living with disabilities. We developed a prototype for WeCanManage, an mHealth-delivered self-management intervention to empower cancer survivors living with disabilities through problem-solving, mindfulness, and self-advocacy training. OBJECTIVE: Our study conducted a heuristic evaluation of the WeCanManage high-fidelity prototype and assessed its usability among cancer survivors with known disabilities. METHODS: We evaluated the prototype using Nielsen's 10 principles of heuristic evaluation with 22 human-computer interaction university students. On the basis of the heuristic evaluation findings, we modified the prototype and conducted usability testing on 10 cancer survivors with a variety of known disabilities, examining effectiveness, efficiency, usability, and satisfaction, including a completion of the modified System Usability Scale (SUS). RESULTS: The findings from the heuristic evaluation were mostly favorable, highlighting the need for a help guide, addressing accessibility concerns, and enhancing the navigation experience. After usability testing, the average SUS score was 81, indicating a good-excellent design. The participants in the usability testing sample expressed positive reactions toward the app's design, educational content and videos, and the available means of connecting with others. They identified areas for improvement, such as improving accessibility, simplifying navigation within the community forums, and providing a more convenient method to access the help guide. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, usability testing showed positive results for the design of WeCanManage. The course content and features helped participants feel heard, understood, and less alone.

The utility of electrocautery for suture passage through bone: A biomechanical study.

Electrosurgical devices are routinely employed during surgery. The use of a Bovie Electrosurgical Unit (ESU) to facilitate the passage of a suture needle through bone has not been studied in the literature. This study aimed to identify force reduction with the application of Bovie ESU to the suture needle through the bone. Peak and the average axial force required for a suture needle to penetrate cadaveric proximal humeri were measured using a custom setup. Twenty-four trials were conducted without electricity, and 72 trials were conducted with a Bovie ESU applying current. Needle size and Bovie ESU power settings were varied. t Tests and analysis of variance were used with p ≤ 0.05 denoting statistical significance. The application of electricity reduced the peak and average axial force needed for a needle to pierce bone, regardless of the Bovie ESU power setting (p < 0.001). The average peak force with the Bovie ESU was 65.7 N, compared with 126.0 N without (p < 0.001), a 47.9% reduction. The average axial force with the Bovie ESU was 38.2 N compared with 81.8 N without (p < 0.001), a 53.3% reduction. There was no significant difference in peak or average axial forces between power settings. At 30 and 90 W of power, larger needle size was associated with significantly lower peak (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively) and axial (p = 0.002 and p = 0.004, respectively) force. The Bovie ESU reduces the axial force required to pass a suture needle through bone. The use of this technique may allow for the avoidance of drilling for soft tissue repair. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 38:954-960, 2020.