Development, validation and evaluation of an online medication review tool (MedReview)

Kaeshaelya Thiruchelvam, Syed Shahzad Hasan, Alex Pudmenzky, Wong Pei Se and Therese Kairuz

PLOS ONE, 2022, vol. 17, issue 6, 1-16

Abstract: Objectives: To develop, validate and evaluate a computerized clinical decision support system (MedReview) that aids medication reviewers with pharmacological decision-making. Methods: This study included three phases; the development phase included computerizing a consolidated medication review algorithm (MedReview), followed by validation and evaluation of MedReview and responding to a web-based survey designed using patient scenarios. Participants had to be ‘fully registered’ with the Malaysian Pharmacy Board and work full-time at a community pharmacy. Results: MedReview was developed as a web app. It was validated among 100 community pharmacists from May-July 2021 using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). There was acceptable content validity and fair inter-rater agreement, and good convergent and discriminant validity. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in five domains to determine the attitude of pharmacists about using MedReview: perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, intention to use, trust, and personal initiatives and characteristics; the total variance explained by five factors was 76.36%. The survey questionnaire had a high overall reliability value of 0.96. Evaluation of MedReview was based on mean scores of survey items. Of all items included in the survey, the highest mean score (out of 7) was achieved for ‘I could use MedReview if it is meaningful/relevant to my daily tasks’ (5.78 ± 1.10), followed by ‘I could use MedReview if I feel confident that the data returned by MedReview is reliable’ (5.77 ± 1.21), and ‘I could use MedReview if it protects the privacy of its users’ (5.73 ± 1.20). Conclusion: Community pharmacists generally had a positive attitude towards MedReview. They found that MedReview is trustworthy and they had the intention to use it when conducting medication reviews. The adaptation of the TAM in the survey instrument was reliable and internally valid.

Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0269322 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 69322&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0269322

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269322

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().