Usability and acceptability testing of a modified early warning scoring (MEWS) tool using simulation
Abstract
Session presented on: Thursday, July 25, 2013:
Purpose: Anticipating barriers when introducing a new form to nurses for incorporation into their daily routine, Kurt Lewin's action research model for change was used as a framework for this study. The purpose was to determine usability and acceptability of the Modified Early Warning Scoring (MEWS) tool by healthcare providers from the hospital units where the tool will be implemented.
Methods: The study used a mixed-methods design. The low-fidelity simulation selected for use in testing usability and acceptability called mock hospital was used. Mannequins were used to represent hospitalized patients in four simulated hospital rooms with four charts for each, thus matching the number of scenarios written. Realistic clinical situations encountered in practice allowed for focus on cognitive and psychological simulation fidelity. The feedback loop included closure through reflection on the experience by reviewing the simulation experiences through a structured, scripted debriefing in a comfortable place independent of distraction. An evaluation tool designed to probe usability, together with attitudes towards the instrument and the use of simulation, using 5-point likert questions and both verbal and written open ended questions was used.
Results: Six 5-point Likert questions evaluating the usability and acceptability if the MEWS tool ranged from 4.44 to 4.84. This indicated subjects 'agreed' to 'strongly agreed' that the MEWS tool was both easy to use and that attitudes towards the tool were positive about the tool's ability to detect at-risk for deterioration patients. The Crobach's alpha level was .83 for the items on the Likert-type evaluation tool. Qualitative feedback demonstrated that the participants valued the form and felt that it would easily fit into their daily routine. Notably, multiple favorable comments were also made regarding usability.
Conclusion: Simulation was successfully used to test both usability and acceptability of a clinical screening tool for identifying the at-risk for deteriorating patient.
Sigma Membership
Iota Mu
Type
Presentation
Format Type
Text-based Document
Study Design/Type
N/A
Research Approach
N/A
Keywords:
Low-fidelity Simulation, Usability/Acceptability Testing, Modified Early Warning Scoring (MEWS)
Recommended Citation
Roney, Jamie K.; Long, JoAnn D.; Maples, Jessica; Stunkard, Kimberley A.; Whitley, Barbara Erin; and Futrell, Lexie Scarborough, "Usability and acceptability testing of a modified early warning scoring (MEWS) tool using simulation" (2013). INRC (Congress). 30.
https://www.sigmarepository.org/inrc/2013/presentations_2013/30
Conference Name
24th International Nursing Research Congress
Conference Host
Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Location
Prague, Czech Republic
Conference Year
2013
Rights Holder
All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.
All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.
All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.
Acquisition
Proxy-submission
Usability and acceptability testing of a modified early warning scoring (MEWS) tool using simulation
Prague, Czech Republic
Session presented on: Thursday, July 25, 2013:
Purpose: Anticipating barriers when introducing a new form to nurses for incorporation into their daily routine, Kurt Lewin's action research model for change was used as a framework for this study. The purpose was to determine usability and acceptability of the Modified Early Warning Scoring (MEWS) tool by healthcare providers from the hospital units where the tool will be implemented.
Methods: The study used a mixed-methods design. The low-fidelity simulation selected for use in testing usability and acceptability called mock hospital was used. Mannequins were used to represent hospitalized patients in four simulated hospital rooms with four charts for each, thus matching the number of scenarios written. Realistic clinical situations encountered in practice allowed for focus on cognitive and psychological simulation fidelity. The feedback loop included closure through reflection on the experience by reviewing the simulation experiences through a structured, scripted debriefing in a comfortable place independent of distraction. An evaluation tool designed to probe usability, together with attitudes towards the instrument and the use of simulation, using 5-point likert questions and both verbal and written open ended questions was used.
Results: Six 5-point Likert questions evaluating the usability and acceptability if the MEWS tool ranged from 4.44 to 4.84. This indicated subjects 'agreed' to 'strongly agreed' that the MEWS tool was both easy to use and that attitudes towards the tool were positive about the tool's ability to detect at-risk for deterioration patients. The Crobach's alpha level was .83 for the items on the Likert-type evaluation tool. Qualitative feedback demonstrated that the participants valued the form and felt that it would easily fit into their daily routine. Notably, multiple favorable comments were also made regarding usability.
Conclusion: Simulation was successfully used to test both usability and acceptability of a clinical screening tool for identifying the at-risk for deteriorating patient.