User-Centered Development of a Mobile App for Biopsychosocial Pain Assessment in Adults: Usability, Reliability, and Validity Study

Overview

Journal JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Medical Informatics

Date 2021 May 14

PMID 33988515

Citations 3

Authors

Filipa Lopes

Mario Rodrigues

Anabela G Silva

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Pain-related mobile apps targeting pain assessment commonly limit pain assessment to pain behaviors and physiological aspects. However, current guidelines state that pain assessment should follow the biopsychosocial model, clearly addressing biological, psychological, and social aspects of the pain experience. Existing reviews also highlight that pain specialists and end users are not commonly involved in the development process of mobile apps for pain assessment, negatively affecting the quality of the available apps.

Objective: This study aimed to develop a mobile app for pain assessment (AvaliaDor) and assess its usability, validity, reliability, and measurement error in a sample of real patients with chronic pain recruited from a physiotherapy clinic.

Methods: This study was divided into 2 phases: phase 1-development of the AvaliaDor app; and phase 2-assessment of the apps' usability, reliability, measurement error, and validity. AvaliaDor was developed (phase 1) based on the literature and the recommendations of physiotherapists and patients with pain in cycles of evaluation, inclusion of recommendations, and reevaluation until no further changes were required. The final version of the app was then tested in patients with musculoskeletal pain attending a private physiotherapy practice (phase 2) who were asked to use the app twice on 2 consecutive days for reliability purposes. In addition, participants had to complete a set of paper-based scales (Brief Pain Inventory, painDETECT, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), which were used to assess the validity (criterion validity and hypothesis testing) of the app, and the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire was used to assess its usability.

Results: The development process (phase 1) included 5 physiotherapists external to the research team and 5 patients with musculoskeletal pain, and it resulted in the creation of an app named AvaliaDor, which includes an assessment of pain intensity, location, and phenotype; associated disability; and the issues of pain catastrophizing and fear of movement. A total of 52 patients with pain (mean age 50.12 years, SD 11.71 years; 39 females) participated in phase 2 and used the app twice. The Pearson correlation coefficient between the scores on the paper-based scales and the app ranged between 0.81 and 0.93 for criterion validity and between 0.41 and 0.59 for hypothesis testing. Test-retest reliability was moderate to good (intraclass correlation coefficient between 0.67 and 0.90) and the score for usability was 1.16 (SD 0.27), indicating good usability.

Conclusions: A mobile app named AvaliaDor was developed to assess the intensity, location, and phenotype of pain; associated disability; and the issues of pain catastrophizing and fear of movement in a user-centered design process. The app was shown to be usable, valid, and reliable for assessing pain from a biopsychosocial perspective in a heterogeneous group of patients with pain. Future work can explore the long-term use of AvaliaDor in clinical contexts and its advantages for the assessment and management of patients with pain.

Citing Articles

PaiNEd app. Assessing central sensitization in survivors of breast cancer: A reliability study.

Fernandez-Gualda M, Ariza-Vega P, Galiano-Castillo N, Tovar-Martin I, Ortiz-Comino L, Lozano-Lozano M Digit Health. 2024; 10:20552076241260150.

PMID: 38882256 PMC: 11179517. DOI: 10.1177/20552076241260150.

Toward a digital citizen lab for capturing data about alternative ways of self-managing chronic pain: An attitudinal user study.

Khalili-Mahani N, Woods S, Holowka E, Pahayahay A, Roy M Front Rehabil Sci. 2022; 3:942822.

PMID: 36188996 PMC: 9397864. DOI: 10.3389/fresc.2022.942822.

Implementation of a Personalized Digital App for Pediatric Preanesthesia Evaluation and Education: Ongoing Usability Analysis and Dynamic Improvement Scheme.

Connelly Y, Lotan R, Sinai Y, Rolls D, Beker A, Abensour E JMIR Form Res. 2022; 6(5):e34129.

PMID: 35416171 PMC: 9121218. DOI: 10.2196/34129.

References

Devan H, Farmery D, Peebles L, Grainger R . Evaluation of Self-Management Support Functions in Apps for People With Persistent Pain: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(2):e13080. PMC: 6390192. DOI: 10.2196/13080. View

Liaw S, Humphreys J . Rural eHealth paradox: it's not just geography!. Aust J Rural Health. 2006; 14(3):95-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2006.00786.x. View

de Jong J, Ogink P, van Bunningen C, Driessen R, Engelen L, Heeren B . A Cloud-Based Virtual Outpatient Clinic for Patient-Centered Care: Proof-of-Concept Study. J Med Internet Res. 2018; 20(9):e10135. PMC: 6231839. DOI: 10.2196/10135. View

Parkerson H, Noel M, Page M, Fuss S, Katz J, Asmundson G . Factorial validity of the English-language version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale--child version. J Pain. 2013; 14(11):1383-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2013.06.004. View

Lutz J, Gross R, Long D, Cox S . Predicting Risk for Opioid Misuse in Chronic Pain with a Single-Item Measure of Catastrophic Thinking. J Am Board Fam Med. 2017; 30(6):828-831. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2017.06.170124. View

Rosser B, Eccleston C . Smartphone applications for pain management. J Telemed Telecare. 2011; 17(6):308-12. DOI: 10.1258/jtt.2011.101102. View

Walter S, Eliasziw M, Donner A . Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1998; 17(1):101-10. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980115)17:1<101::aid-sim727>3.0.co;2-e. View

Cleeland C, Ryan K . Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singap. 1994; 23(2):129-38. View

Maramba I, Chatterjee A, Newman C . Methods of usability testing in the development of eHealth applications: A scoping review. Int J Med Inform. 2019; 126:95-104. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.03.018. View

10.

Silva A, Simoes P, Santos R, Queiros A, Rocha N, Rodrigues M . A Scale to Assess the Methodological Quality of Studies Assessing Usability of Electronic Health Products and Services: Delphi Study Followed by Validity and Reliability Testing. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21(11):e14829. PMC: 6884719. DOI: 10.2196/14829. View

11.

Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B . Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018; 52(4):1893-1907. PMC: 5993836. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8. View

12.

Sullivan M, Adams H, Sullivan M . Communicative dimensions of pain catastrophizing: social cueing effects on pain behaviour and coping. Pain. 2004; 107(3):220-226. DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.11.003. View

13.

Mokkink L, de Vet H, Prinsen C, Patrick D, Alonso J, Bouter L . COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Qual Life Res. 2017; 27(5):1171-1179. PMC: 5891552. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4. View

14.

Sandhu H, Wilson K, Reed N, Mihailidis A . A Mobile Phone App for the Self-Management of Pediatric Concussion: Development and Usability Testing. JMIR Hum Factors. 2019; 6(2):e12135. PMC: 6658289. DOI: 10.2196/12135. View

15.

Thurnheer S, Gravestock I, Pichierri G, Steurer J, Burgstaller J . Benefits of Mobile Apps in Pain Management: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018; 6(10):e11231. PMC: 6231845. DOI: 10.2196/11231. View

16.

Tampin B, Bohne T, Callan M, Kvia M, Melsom Myhre A, Neoh E . Reliability of the English version of the painDETECT questionnaire. Curr Med Res Opin. 2017; 33(4):741-748. DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2017.1278682. View

17.

Fillingim R, Loeser J, Baron R, Edwards R . Assessment of Chronic Pain: Domains, Methods, and Mechanisms. J Pain. 2016; 17(9 Suppl):T10-20. PMC: 5010652. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.08.010. View

18.

Bedson J, Hill J, White D, Chen Y, Wathall S, Dent S . Development and validation of a pain monitoring app for patients with musculoskeletal conditions (The Keele pain recorder feasibility study). BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2019; 19(1):24. PMC: 6347830. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-019-0741-z. View

19.

Donoghue D, Stokes E . How much change is true change? The minimum detectable change of the Berg Balance Scale in elderly people. J Rehabil Med. 2009; 41(5):343-6. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0337. View

20.

van Kampen D, Willems W, Van Beers L, Castelein R, Scholtes V, Terwee C . Determination and comparison of the smallest detectable change (SDC) and the minimal important change (MIC) of four-shoulder patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). J Orthop Surg Res. 2013; 8:40. PMC: 3842665. DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-8-40. View