Acceptability, Usability, and Views on Deployment of Peek, a Mobile Phone mHealth Intervention for Eye Care in Kenya: Qualitative Study

Background The Portable Eye Examination Kit (Peek) is a mobile phone–based ophthalmic testing system that has been developed to perform comprehensive eye examinations. Shortages in ophthalmic personnel, the high cost, and the difficulty in transporting equipment have made it challenging to offer services, particularly in rural areas. Peek offers a solution for overcoming barriers of limited access to traditional ophthalmic testing methods and has been pilot tested on adults in Nakuru, Kenya, and compared with traditional eye examination tools. Objective This qualitative study evaluated the acceptability and usability of Peek in addition to perceptions regarding its adoption and nationwide deployment. Methods Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients and analyzed using a framework approach. This included analysis of interviews from 20 patients, 8 health care providers (HCPs), and 4 key decision makers in ophthalmic health care provision in Kenya. The participants were purposefully sampled. The coding structure involved predefined themes for assessing the following: (1) the context, that is, environment, user, task, and technology; (2) patient acceptability, that is, patients' perceived benefits, patient preference, and patient satisfaction; (3) usability, that is, efficiency, effectiveness, learnability, and flexibility and operability of Peek; and (4) the benefits of Peek in strengthening eye care provision, that is, capabilities enhancer, opportunity creator, social enabler, and knowledge generator. Emerging themes relating to the objectives were explored from the data using thematic analysis. Results Patients found Peek to be acceptable because of its benefits in overcoming the barriers to accessing ophthalmic services. Most thought it to be fast, convenient, and able to reach a large population. All patients expressed being satisfied with Peek. The HCPs perceived it to satisfy the criteria for usability and found Peek to be acceptable based on the technology acceptance model. Peek was also found to have features required for strengthening ophthalmic delivery by aiding detection and diagnosis, provision of decision support, improving communication between provider and patient and among providers, linking patients to services, monitoring, and assisting in education and training. Some of the deployment-related issues included the need for government and community involvement, communication and awareness creation, data protection, infrastructure development including capacity creation, and training and maintenance support. Conclusions According to all parties interviewed, Peek is an acceptable solution, as it provides a beneficial service, supports patients' needs, and fulfills HCPs' roles, overall contributing to strengthening eye health.

[1]  M. Patton Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. , 1990 .

[2]  R. B.,et al.  The United Nations , 1947, Nature.

[3]  Illhoi Yoo,et al.  A Systematic Review of Healthcare Applications for Smartphones , 2012, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[4]  Tom Stewart,et al.  Usability evaluation , 2009, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[5]  Gari D Clifford,et al.  SMARTHealth India: Development and Field Evaluation of a Mobile Clinical Decision Support System for Cardiovascular Diseases in Rural India , 2014, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[6]  C. Dolea,et al.  World Health Organization , 1949, International Organization.

[7]  A. Chib The promise and peril of mHealth in developing countries , 2013 .

[8]  Garrett Mehl,et al.  mHealth innovations as health system strengthening tools: 12 common applications and a visual framework , 2013, Global Health: Science and Practice.

[9]  Arul Chib,et al.  Midwives and mobiles: using ICTs to improve healthcare in Aceh Besar, Indonesia1 , 2008 .

[10]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[11]  Mohammad Chuttur,et al.  Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: Origins, Developments and Future Directions , 2009 .

[12]  N. Ahuja,et al.  The Smartphone in Medicine: A Review of Current and Potential Use Among Physicians and Students , 2012, Journal of medical Internet research.

[13]  P. Schulz,et al.  Mapping mHealth Research: A Decade of Evolution , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[14]  Emmanuelle Daviaud,et al.  Applying a framework for assessing the health system challenges to scaling up mHealth in South Africa , 2012, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[15]  Ja Wilson,et al.  Principles and practice of screening for disease , 1968 .

[16]  Tunde Peto,et al.  The Nakuru eye disease cohort study: methodology & rationale , 2014, BMC Ophthalmology.

[17]  Clara B. Aranda-Jan,et al.  Systematic review on what works, what does not work and why of implementation of mobile health (mHealth) projects in Africa , 2014, BMC Public Health.

[18]  M. Foran,et al.  mHealth in Sub-Saharan Africa , 2013, International journal of telemedicine and applications.

[19]  Arul Chib,et al.  The Hope of Mobile Phones in Indian Rural Healthcare , 2012 .

[20]  Munesh Chandra Trivedi,et al.  Role of context in usability evaluations: A review , 2012, ArXiv.

[21]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[22]  A. Bastawrous,et al.  Development and Validation of a Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test (Peek Acuity) for Clinical Practice and Community-Based Fieldwork. , 2015, JAMA ophthalmology.

[23]  K. Naidoo,et al.  Poverty and Eye Health , 2014 .

[24]  Judith Green,et al.  Qualitative methods for health research , 2004 .

[25]  M. Conner,et al.  The Theory of Planned Behaviour , 2004 .

[26]  J E Keeffe,et al.  Impact of unilateral and bilateral vision loss on quality of life , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[27]  Alain Abran,et al.  Usability Meanings and Interpretations in ISO Standards , 2003, Software Quality Journal.

[28]  Garrett Mehl,et al.  Harnessing mHealth in Low-Resource Settings to Overcome Health System Constraints and Achieve Universal Access to Healthcare , 2014 .

[29]  A. Haines,et al.  The Effectiveness of Mobile-Health Technology-Based Health Behaviour Change or Disease Management Interventions for Health Care Consumers: A Systematic Review , 2013, PLoS medicine.

[30]  I. Ajzen The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[31]  J. Fereday,et al.  Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development , 2006 .

[32]  Constantinos K. Coursaris,et al.  A Qualitative Review of Empirical Mobile Usability Studies , 2006, AMCIS.

[33]  Caricia Catalani,et al.  Community Health Workers and Mobile Technology: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2013, PloS one.

[34]  D. Pascolini,et al.  Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010 , 2011, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[35]  R. Bollinger,et al.  Perceptions and acceptability of mHealth interventions for improving patient care at a community-based HIV/AIDS clinic in Uganda: A mixed methods study , 2013, AIDS care.

[36]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies , 2000, Management Science.

[37]  I. Dey Qualitative Data Analysis: A User Friendly Guide for Social Scientists , 1993 .

[38]  W. Jack,et al.  Effects of a mobile phone short message service on antiretroviral treatment adherence in Kenya (WelTel Kenya1): a randomised trial , 2010, The Lancet.

[39]  Steven J. Reynolds,et al.  Impact of a mHealth Intervention for Peer Health Workers on AIDS Care in Rural Uganda: A Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Cluster-Randomized Trial , 2011, AIDS and Behavior.

[40]  G. Ayala,et al.  Qualitative methods to ensure acceptability of behavioral and social interventions to the target population. , 2011, Journal of public health dentistry.

[41]  L. Swartz,et al.  Scaling Up mHealth: Where Is the Evidence? , 2013, PLoS medicine.

[42]  Lavanya Vasudevan,et al.  Mobile health for non-communicable diseases in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of the literature and strategic framework for research , 2014, Globalization and Health.