Methods: Usability testing was conducted with five subjects. The project was explained to the subjects and a test scenario was provided to evaluate their baseline decision-making. Next, the tool was introduced during a ten-minute run-in period. The subjects were then exposed to a new scenario and their decision-making was evaluated using the tool. Each subject’s EAI technique was evaluated using a standardized checklist. Additionally, subjects were asked to provide feedback on the application’s health literacy level, design and usability.
Results: Overall, subjects felt that the program was easy to use. Notably, 4 of 5 subjects made mistakes during the baseline EAI scenario but improved at the second scenario. Minor changes were recommended to enhance the tool’s health literacy. All subjects “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that the app would help family and friends learn about anaphylaxis and would make them feel safer.
Conclusions: This mHealth application was favorably evaluated during usability testing. Baseline testing reaffirmed the need for the program. Constructive feedback from the subjects is currently being incorporated into an updated version for the next phase of testing.