Advertisement

My Pain Coach: A Mobile System with Tangible Interface for Pain Assessment

  • Maurizio Caon
  • Leonardo Angelini
  • Katharina Ledermann
  • Chantal Martin-Sölch
  • Omar Abou Khaled
  • Elena Mugellini
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)

Abstract

Pain assessment is an essential first step in planning for and providing pain management. Access to effective pain management programs is often limited, due to scarcity of services. Other barriers to treatment include physical symptoms that limit mobility, distance from a clinic, transportation requirements and cost constraints. In response to these barriers to service delivery, the demand for online health resources is growing. However, current solutions present a number of shortcomings, in particular when referring to usability and accessibility. This paper presents the vision of the My Pain Coach system and the first prototype generated as the result of the first iteration of the development process. This prototype is based on a smartphone app and presents two different interfaces: a force-sensitive touchscreen, and a tangible interface based on a textile mat. A preliminary usability evaluation has been conducted and the results show that these interfaces are perceived as excellent from a usability point of view. Nevertheless, further development and testing are still required for the tangible interface.

Keywords

Pain assessment Pain management Tangible interaction Mobile app 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors want to thank Andrea Della Porta for his valuable contribution to this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Zwakhalen SM, Hamers JP, Abu-Saad HH, Berger MP (2006) Pain in elderly people with severe dementia: a systematic review of behavioural pain assessment tools. BMC Geriatr 6(1):3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sharlin E, Watson B, Kitamura Y, Kishino F, Itoh Y (2004) On tangible user interfaces, humans and spatiality. Pers Ubiquit Comput 8(5):338–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Angelini L, Carrino F, Caon, M, Lemaréchal F, Couture N, Khaled OA, Mugellini E (2016) Testing the tangible interactive window with older adults. GeroPsychGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lalloo C, Kumbhare D, Stinson JN, Henry JL (2014) Pain-QuILT: clinical feasibility of a web-based visual pain assessment tool in adults with chronic pain. J Med Internet Res 16(5):e127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martorella G, Côté J, Racine M, Choinière M (2012) Web-based nursing intervention for self-management of pain after cardiac surgery: pilot randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 14(6):e177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Irvine AB, Russell H, Manocchia M, Mino DE, Glassen TC, Morgan R, Gau JM, Birney AJ, Ary DV (2015) Mobile-web app to self-manage low back pain: randomized controlled trial. J. Med Internet Res 17(1):e1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fu MR, Axelrod D, Guth A, Scagliola J, Rampertaap K, El-Shammaa N, Fletcher J, Zhang Y, Qiu JM, Schnabel F, Hiotis K (2016) A web-and mobile-based intervention for women treated for breast cancer to manage chronic pain and symptoms related to lymphedema: randomized clinical trial rationale and protocol. JMIR Res Protoc 5(1):e7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stinson JN, Jibb LA, Nguyen C, Nathan PC, Maloney AM, Dupuis LL, Gerstle JT, Alman B, Hopyan S, Strahlendorf C, Portwine C (2013) Development and testing of a multidimensional iPhone pain assessment application for adolescents with cancer. J Med Internet Res 15(3):e51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spyridonis F, Ghinea G, Frank AO (2013) Attitudes of patients toward adoption of 3D technology in pain assessment: qualitative perspective. J Med Internet Res 15(4):e55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vaucelle C, Bonanni L, Ishii H (2009, April. Design of haptic interfaces for therapy. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 467–470). ACMGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gervais R, Frey J, Gay A, Lotte F, Hachet M (2016) Tobe: tangible out-of-body experience. In: Proceedings of the TEI’16: tenth international conference on tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction, pp 227–235. ACMGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Brooke J (1996) SUS-a quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Eval Ind 189(194):4–7Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bangor A, Kortum P, Miller J (2009) Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. J Usability Stud 4(3):114–123Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western SwitzerlandFribourgSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of Psychiatry and PsychotherapyUniversity Hospital ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations