JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Stroke may lead to various disabilities, and a structured follow-up visit is strongly recommended within a few months after an event. To facilitate this visit, the digital previsit tool “Stroke Health (SH) was developed for patients to fill out in advance.

Objective:

The main study aim was to use a patient survey to evaluate the digital previsit tool SH when used ahead of a follow-up visit, with a focus on feasibility and relevance from the perspective of people with stroke. A second aim was to explore the extent to which the previsit tool identified stroke-related health problems.

Methods:

Between November 2020 and June 2021, a web-based survey was sent to patients who were scheduled for a follow-up visit after discharge from a stroke unit and had recently filled in the previsit tool. Fifteen items on the survey covered demographic characteristics, internet habits, and satisfaction, rated using five response options. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze answers to these items. Four additional questions that required a free-text response were thematically analyzed. We also compared characteristics of those who completed and did not complete the survey.

Results:

All patients filling out the previsit tool (n=80) were community-dwelling, with a median age of 67 (range 32–91) years. Most had experienced a mild stroke and reported a median of two stroke-related health problems (range 0–8), and they were significantly younger than non-responders. The survey evaluating the previsit tool was completed by 58 (39 men) patients. Most (82%) reported using the internet daily and expressed satisfaction or high satisfaction (85%–100%) about using SH. Most respondents (97%) also were either satisfied or very satisfied with how well the previsit tool captured their health problems after the stroke. The highest level of dissatisfaction was related to the response options in SH (n=5). Based on the free-text answers to the survey, we developed four themes. First, SH was perceived to provide a structure that ensured that issues would be emphasized and considered. Second, the user-friendliness and accessibility were viewed as acceptable, although respondents suggested improvements. Third, participants raised awareness about being approached digitally for communication and highlighted the importance of how to be approached. Fourth, their experiences with SH were influenced by their perception of the explanatory texts, the response options, and the possibility of elaborating on their answers in free text.

Conclusions:

People with stroke considered the freely available previsit tool SH feasible for preparing in advance for a follow-up visit. Despite high satisfaction with how well the tool captured their health problems, participants indicated that additional free-text responses and revised information could enhance usability. Improvements need to be considered in parallel with qualitative data to ensure that the tool meets patient needs.