BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (Jan 2019)

Initial development of Supportive care Assessment, Prioritization and Recommendations for Kids (SPARK), a symptom screening and management application

  • Sadie Cook,
  • Emily Vettese,
  • Dilip Soman,
  • Shannon Hyslop,
  • Susan Kuczynski,
  • Brenda Spiegler,
  • Hailey Davis,
  • Nathan Duong,
  • Stacee Ou Wai,
  • Robert Golabek,
  • Patryk Golabek,
  • Adam Antoszek-Rallo,
  • Tal Schechter,
  • L. Lee Dupuis,
  • Lillian Sung

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-018-0715-6
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background We developed Supportive care Prioritization, Assessment and Recommendations for Kids (SPARK), a web-based application designed to facilitate symptom screening by children receiving cancer treatments and access to supportive care clinical practice guidelines primarily by healthcare providers. The objective was to describe the initial development and evaluation of SPARK from the perspective of children. Implementation Development and evaluation occurred in three phases: (1) low fidelity focused on functionality, (2) design focused on “look and feel” and (3) high fidelity confirmed functionality and design. Cognitive interviews were conducted with children receiving cancer treatments 8–18 years of age. Evaluation occurred after every five interviews and changes were guided by a Review Panel. Quantitative evaluation included SPARK ease of use and understandability of SPARK reports. Results The number of children included by phase were: low fidelity (n = 30), design (n = 30) and high fidelity (n = 30). Across phases, the median age was 13.2 (range 8.5 to 18.4) years. During low-fidelity and design phases, iterative refinements to SPARK improved website navigation, usability and likability from the perspective of children and established symptom report design. Among the last 10 children enrolled to high-fidelity testing, all (100%) understood how to complete symptom screening, access reports and interpret reports. Among these 10 respondents, all (100%) found SPARK easy to use and 9 (90%) found SPARK reports were easy to understand. Conclusions SPARK is a web-based application which is usable and understandable, and it is now appropriate to use for research. Future efforts will focus on clinical implementation of SPARK.

Keywords