Qualitative User Experience Evaluation of the MS Trust's Online Treatment Decision Aid Tool's Accommodation of Planning Pregnancy

Overview

Journal Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin

Date 2024 Jun 14

PMID 38873031

Authors

Lubna Almouzain

Fiona L Hamilton

Declan Chard

Fiona Stevenson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Decision-making about treatment when planning a pregnancy (family planning) is complex for women living with multiple sclerosis (MS). Decision tools can help this process, in 2016 MS Trust launched their online digital treatment decision tool to support people with MS.

Objectives: To evaluate user-experience of this tool by exploring women's opinions about its content, interface, and usefulness in the context of family planning; and to synthesize recommendations to improve the tool.

Methods: Thirty participants qualitatively evaluated the tool using Think Aloud methodology. Sessions were conducted online using Microsoft Teams and were video recorded. Transcription was automated and data were thematically analyzed.

Results: Women's first impression was that the tool presented a lot of information at once, which was difficult to take in, and they found it difficult to navigate. Although the tool was helpful in allowing them to compare treatment options, the filters were confusing, and the information related to pregnancy sometimes contradicted advice from their healthcare practitioners. They suggested rewording the pregnancy recommendations and filters, updating some content, and making some changes to the interface to meet users' cognitive needs.

Conclusion: The MS Trust treatment decision tool is excellent in helping women with treatment choices at initial diagnosis. However, it is not currently as useful when considering family plans. Recommendations were conveyed to MS Trust where some are now applied to the new live version and the rest are to be considered for future updating projects.

References

Rasmussen P, Magyari M, Moberg J, Bogelund M, Jensen U, Madsen K . Patient awareness about family planning represents a major knowledge gap in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018; 24:129-134. DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2018.06.006. View

Bansback N, Chiu J, Metcalfe R, Lapointe E, Schabas A, Lenzen M . Preliminary testing of a patient decision aid for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2021; 7(3):20552173211029966. PMC: 8287362. DOI: 10.1177/20552173211029966. View

Washington F, Langdon D . Factors affecting adherence to disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis: systematic review. J Neurol. 2021; 269(4):1861-1872. PMC: 8940867. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-021-10850-w. View

Ben-Zacharia A, Adamson M, Boyd A, Hardeman P, Smrtka J, Walker B . Impact of Shared Decision Making on Disease-Modifying Drug Adherence in Multiple Sclerosis. Int J MS Care. 2018; 20(6):287-297. PMC: 6295876. DOI: 10.7224/1537-2073.2017-070. View

Smith A, Cohen J, Ontaneda D, Rensel M . Pregnancy and multiple sclerosis: Risk of unplanned pregnancy and drug exposure in utero. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2019; 5(4):2055217319891744. PMC: 6909269. DOI: 10.1177/2055217319891744. View

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

Bansback N, Chiu J, Carruthers R, Metcalfe R, Lapointe E, Schabas A . Development and usability testing of a patient decision aid for newly diagnosed relapsing multiple sclerosis patients. BMC Neurol. 2019; 19(1):173. PMC: 6642472. DOI: 10.1186/s12883-019-1382-7. View

OConnor A, Jacobsen M, Stacey D . An evidence-based approach to managing women's decisional conflict. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2002; 31(5):570-81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2002.tb00083.x. View

Kolcava J, Kocica J, Hulova M, Dusek L, Horakova M, Kerkovsky M . Conversion of clinically isolated syndrome to multiple sclerosis: a prospective study. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2020; 44:102262. DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2020.102262. View

10.

Sepucha K, Borkhoff C, Lally J, Levin C, Matlock D, Jenn Ng C . Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids: key constructs and measurement instruments. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014; 13 Suppl 2:S12. PMC: 4044563. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S12. View

11.

Baskaran A, Grebenciucova E, Shoemaker T, Graham E . Current Updates on the Diagnosis and Management of Multiple Sclerosis for the General Neurologist. J Clin Neurol. 2023; 19(3):217-229. PMC: 10169923. DOI: 10.3988/jcn.2022.0208. View

12.

Prunty M, Sharpe L, Butow P, Fulcher G . The motherhood choice: a decision aid for women with multiple sclerosis. Patient Educ Couns. 2007; 71(1):108-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.10.021. View

13.

Kremer I, Jongen P, Evers S, Hoogervorst E, Verhagen W, Hiligsmann M . Patient decision aid based on multi-criteria decision analysis for disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis: prototype development. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021; 21(1):123. PMC: 8033667. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-021-01479-w. View

14.

Lublin F, Reingold S, Cohen J, Cutter G, Soelberg Sorensen P, Thompson A . Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: the 2013 revisions. Neurology. 2014; 83(3):278-86. PMC: 4117366. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000560. View

15.

Romero-Pinel L, Bau L, Matas E, Leon I, Munoz-Vendrell A, Arroyo P . The age at onset of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis has increased over the last five decades. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2022; 68:104103. DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2022.104103. View

16.

Hakim H, Newland P, Oliver B . Initial User Testing of Decision Aids for Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Therapies. J Neurosci Nurs. 2020; 52(4):160-165. DOI: 10.1097/JNN.0000000000000521. View

17.

De Seze J, Borgel F, Brudon F . Patient perceptions of multiple sclerosis and its treatment. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2012; 6:263-73. PMC: 3333819. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S27038. View