Journal of Cancer Survivorship

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 316–325 | Cite as

Usability and acceptance evaluation of ACESO: a Web-based breast cancer survivorship tool

  • Akshat Kapoor
  • Priya Nambisan



The specific objective of this research is to design and develop a personalized Web application to support breast cancer survivors after treatment, as they deal with post-treatment challenges, such as comorbidities and side effects of treatment.


A mixed-methods approach, utilizing a combination of think-aloud analysis, personal interviews, and surveys, was adopted for user acceptance and usability testing among a group of breast cancer survivors. User feedback was gathered on their perceived value of the application, and any user-interface issues that may hinder the overall usability were identified.


The application’s portability and capability of organizing their entire breast cancer-related medical history as well as tracking various quality of life indicators were perceived to be valuable features. The application had an overall high usability; however, certain sections of the application were not as intuitive to locate. Visual elements of the website were appreciated; however, overall experience would benefit from incorporating more sociable elements that exhibit positive re-enforcement within the end user and provide a friendlier experience.


The results of the study showcase the need for more personalized tools and resources to support survivors in self-management. It also demonstrates the ability to integrate breast cancer survivorship care plans from diverse providers and paves the way to add further value-added features in consumer health applications, such as personal decision support.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

Using a personal decision support-based tool can serve as a training tool and resource, providing these patients with pertinent information about the various aspects of their long-term health, while educating them about any related side effects and symptoms. It is hoped that making such tools more accessible could help in engaging survivors to play an active role in managing their health and encourage shared decision-making with their providers.


Breast cancer Survivorship Patient engagement Self-management Patient reported outcomes 


Authors’ Contributions

AK conceptualized, designed, and developed the intervention, contributed to data collection, analysis, and wrote sections of the manuscript. PN contributed to the study design, interpretation, and analysis of results and wrote sections of the manuscript.


This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sector.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Supplementary material

11764_2017_670_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (836 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 835 kb)


  1. 1.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(1):5–29. Scholar
  2. 2.
    American Cancer Society. How Common Is Breast Cancer? Accessed July 26, 2017.
  3. 3.
    Cheng KKF, Darshini Devi R, Wong WH, Koh C. Perceived symptoms and the supportive care needs of breast cancer survivors six months to five years post-treatment period. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2014;18(1):3–9. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boyes AW, Girgis A, D’Este C, Zucca AC. Prevalence and correlates of cancer survivors’ supportive care needs 6 months after diagnosis: a population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer. 2012;12(1):150. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harrison JD, Young JM, Price MA, Butow PN, Solomon MJ. What are the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer? A systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(8):1117–28. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bower JE, Ganz PA, Desmond KA, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE, Belin TR. Fatigue in breast cancer survivors: occurrence, correlates, and impact on quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(4):743–53. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cappiello M, Cunningham RS, Knobf MT, Erdos D. Breast cancer survivors: information and support after treatment. Clin Nurs Res. 2007;16(4):278–93. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fobair P, Stewart SL, Chang S, D’Onofrio C, Banks PJ, Bloom JR. Body image and sexual problems in young women with breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2006;15(7):579–94. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Khatcheressian JL, Wolff AC, Smith TJ, Grunfeld E, Muss HB, Vogel VG, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2006 update of the breast cancer follow-up and management guidelines in the adjuvant setting. J Clin Oncolo Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2006;24(31):5091–7. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fann JR, Thomas-Rich AM, Katon WJ, Cowley D, Pepping M, McGregor BA, et al. Major depression after breast cancer: a review of epidemiology and treatment. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008;30(2):112–26. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lasry JM, Margolese RG, Poisson R, et al. Depression and body image following mastectomy and lumpectomy. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(6):529–34. Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carpenter JS, Elam JL, Ridner SH, Carney PH, Cherry GJ, Cucullu HL. Sleep, fatigue, and depressive symptoms in breast cancer survivors and matched healthy women experiencing hot flashes. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2007;31(3):591–8. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Savard J, Simard S, Blanchet J, Ivers H, Morin CM. Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and risk factors for insomnia in the context of breast cancer. Sleep. 2001;24(5):583–90. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ganz PA, Desmond KA, Belin TR, Meyerowitz BE, Rowland JH. Predictors of sexual health in women after a breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 1999;17(8):2371–80. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meyerowitz BE, Desmond KA, Rowland JH, Wyatt GE, Ganz PA. Sexuality following breast cancer. J Sex Marital Ther. 1999;25(3):237–50. Scholar
  16. 16.
    Demark-Wahnefried W, Clipp EC, Lipkus IM, Lobach D, Snyder DC, Sloane R, et al. Main outcomes of the FRESH START trial: a sequentially tailored, diet and exercise mailed print intervention among breast and prostate cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(19):2709–18. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patterson RE, Neuhouser ML, Hedderson MM, Schwartz SM, Standish LJ, Bowen DJ. Changes in diet, physical activity, and supplement use among adults diagnosed with cancer. J Am Diet Assoc. 2003;103(3):323–8. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Adams RN, Mosher CE, Blair CK, Snyder DC, Sloane R, Demark-Wahnefried W. Cancer survivors’ uptake and adherence in diet and exercise intervention trials: an integrative data analysis. Cancer. 2015;121(1):77–83. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Demark-Wahnefried W, Rogers LQ, Alfano CM, Thomson CA, Courneya KS, Meyerhardt JA, et al. Practical clinical interventions for diet, physical activity, and weight control in cancer survivors. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(3):167–89. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fredette SL. Breast cancer survivors: concerns and coping. Cancer Nurs. 1995;18(1):35–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paskett ED, Stark N. Lymphedema: knowledge, treatment, and impact among breast cancer survivors. Breast J. 2000;6(6):373–8. Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leedham B, Ganz PA. Psychosocial concerns and quality of life in breast cancer survivors. Cancer Investig. 1999;17(5):342–8. Scholar
  23. 23.
    Billett J, Crossing S. A consumer-initiated survey of women’s experiences of breast cancer services in New South Wales. N S W Public Health Bull. 2003;14(6):117–9. Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ganz PA, Hahn EE. Implementing a survivorship care plan for patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(5):759–67. Scholar
  25. 25.
    NCI Community Cancer Centers Program. Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Plan. 08 2008.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Grunfeld E, Julian JA, Pond G, Maunsell E, Coyle D, Folkes A, et al. Evaluating survivorship care plans: results of a randomized, clinical trial of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(36):4755–62. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mayer DK, Gerstel A, Leak AN, Smith SK. Patient and provider preferences for survivorship care plans. JOP. 2012;8(4):e80–6. Scholar
  28. 28.
    Makaryus AN, Friedman EA. Patients’ understanding of their treatment plans and diagnosis at discharge. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005;80(8):991–4. Scholar
  29. 29.
    Anderson JL, Dodman S, Kopelman M, Fleming A. Patient information recall in a rheumatology clinic. Rheumatology (Oxford). 1979;18(1):18–22. Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pickney CS, Arnason JA. Correlation between patient recall of bone densitometry results and subsequent treatment adherence. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16(9):1156–60. Scholar
  31. 31.
    Black N. Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed). 2013;346:f167. Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ. Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(2):345–53. Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fallowfield L, Jenkins V. Psychosocial/survivorship issues in breast cancer: are we doing better? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(1):335. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brennan ME, Butow P, Marven M, Spillane AJ, Boyle FM. Survivorship care after breast cancer treatment—experiences and preferences of Australian women. Breast. 2011;20(3):271–7. Scholar
  35. 35.
    Royce, W. Managing the development of large software systems. In: Proc. Westcon, pp. 328–339. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos (1970).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Davis F. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. 1986.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dillon A. User acceptance of information technology. Published June 30, 2005. Accessed 26 July 2017.
  38. 38.
    Ozok AA, Gurses AP, Wu H, Nelson M, Moen D, Wei J. Usability and user acceptance for personal health records: a perspective from healthcare citizens. In: Online communities and social computing. Lecture notes in computer science. Berlin: Springer; 2009. p. 690–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    King WR, He J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Inf Manag. 2006;43(6):740–55. Scholar
  40. 40.
    van Osch M, Rövekamp A, Bergman-Agteres SN, et al. User preferences and usability of iVitality: optimizing an innovative online research platform for home-based health monitoring. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:857–67. Scholar
  41. 41.
    Keselman A, Logan R, Smith CA, Leroy G, Zeng-Treitler Q. Developing informatics tools and strategies for consumer-centered health communication. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15(4):473–83. Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mirkovic J, Kaufman DR, Ruland CM. Supporting cancer patients in illness management: usability evaluation of a mobile app. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2(3):e33. Scholar
  43. 43.
    Drott J, Vilhelmsson M, Kjellgren K, Berterö C. Experiences with a self-reported mobile phone-based system among patients with colorectal cancer: a qualitative study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4(2):e66. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kim E, Wang M, Lau C, Kim Y. Application and evaluation of personal health information management system. Proceedings of the 26th annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS. 2004.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Miller SM, Hudson SV, Hui S-KA, et al. Development and preliminary testing of PROGRESS: a web-based education program for prostate cancer survivors transitioning from active treatment. J Cancer Surviv. 2015;9(3):541–53. Scholar
  46. 46.
    Anders EK, Simon HA. How to study thinking in everyday life: contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind Cult Act. 1998;5(3):178–86. Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nambisan P. Online public health preparedness training programs: an evaluation of user experience with the technological environment. Online J Public Health Inform. 2010;2(3)
  48. 48.
    Nambisan P. Evaluating patient experience in online health communities: implications for health care organizations. Health Care Manag Rev. 2011;36(2):124–33. Scholar
  49. 49.
    Brennan PF, Kwiatkowski K. How do lay people manage health information in the home? In: Marques E, editor. Proceedings, 8th international congress in nursing informatics 2003. New York: Elsevier; 2003.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, Sandler HM, Northouse L, Hembroff L, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(12):1250–61. Scholar
  51. 51.
    Roberts CS, Cox CE, Reintgen DS, Baile WF, Gibertini M. Influence of physician communication on newly diagnosed breast patients’ psychologic adjustment and decision-making. Cancer. 1994;74(S1):336–41. Scholar
  52. 52.
    Marcotte L, Seidman J, Trudel K, et al. Achieving meaningful use of health information technology: a guide for physicians to the EHR incentive programs. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(9):731–6. Scholar
  53. 53.
    Travers M. Qualitative research through case studies. SAGE; 2001, DOI:
  54. 54.
    Wiley: Handbook of usability testing: how to plan, design, and conduct effective tests, 2nd Edition - Jeffrey Rubin, Dana Chisnell, Jared Spool. Accessed July 31, 2017.
  55. 55.
    Mayer DK, Terrin NC, Kreps GL, Menon U, McCance K, Parsons SK, et al. Cancer survivors information seeking behaviors: a comparison of survivors who do and do not seek information about cancer. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;65(3):342–50. Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mayer DK, Terrin NC, Menon U, Kreps GL, McCance K, Parsons SK, et al. Health behaviors in cancer survivors. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2007;34(3):643–51. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Satterlund MJ, McCaul KD, Sandgren AK. Information gathering over time by breast cancer patients. J Med Internet Res. 2003;5(3)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Health Services and Information ManagementEast Carolina UniversityGreenvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health Informatics and Administration, Social Media and Health Research and Training Lab, College of Health SciencesUniversity of Wisconsin – MilwaukeeMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations