Background A decreased capacity to self-manage medications results in nonadherence, medication errors, and drug-related problems in older adults. Previous research identified 80 electronic medication adherence products available to assist patients with self-management of medications. Unfortunately, the usability and workload of these products are unknown. Objective This study aimed to examine the usability and workload of a sample of electronic medication adherence products. Methods In a prospective, mixed methods study, a sample of older adults, health care professionals, and caregivers tested the usability and workload of 21 electronic medication adherence products. Each participant tested 5 products, one at a time, after which they completed the system usability scale (SUS) and NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX), instruments that measure the usability and workload involved in using a product. Higher SUS scores indicate more user-friendliness, whereas lower NASA-TLX raw scores indicate less workload when using a product. Results Electronic medication adherence products required a mean of 12.7 steps (range 5-20) for the appropriate use and took, on average, 15.19 min to complete the setup tasks (range 1-56). Participants were able to complete all steps without assistance 55.3% of the time (103 out of the 186 tests were completed by 39 participants; range 0%-100%). The mean SUS and NASA-TLX raw scores were 52.8 (SD 28.7; range 0-100) and 50.0 (SD 25.7; range 4.2-99.2), respectively, revealing significant variability among the electronic medication adherence products. The most user-friendly products were found to be TimerCap travel size (mean 78.67, SD 15.57; P=.03) and eNNOVEA Weekly Planner with Advanced Auto Reminder (mean 78.13, SD 14.13; P=.049) as compared with MedReady 1700 automated medication dispenser (mean 28.63, SD 21.24). Similarly, MedReady (72.92, SD 18.69) was found to be significantly more work intensive when compared with TimerCap (29.35, SD 20.35; P=.03), e-pill MedGlider home medication management system (28.43, SD 20.80; P=.02), and eNNOVEA (28.65, SD 14.97; P=.03). The e-pill MedTime Station automatic pill dispenser with tipper (71.77, SD 21.98) had significantly more workload than TimerCap (P=.04), MedGlider (P=.03), and eNNOVEA (P=.04). Conclusions This study demonstrated that variability exists in the usability and workload of different electronic medication adherence products among older adults, caregivers, and clinicians. With few studies having investigated the usability and workload of electronic medication adherence products, no benchmarks exist to compare the usability and workload of these products. However, our study highlights the need to assess the usability and workload of different products marketed to assist with medication taking and provides guidance to clinicians regarding electronic medication adherence product recommendations for their patients. Future development of electronic medication adherence products should ensure that the target populations of patients are able to use these products adequately to improve medication management.

Background Medication management among older adults continues to be a challenge, and innovative electronic medication adherence products have been developed to address this need. Objective The aim of this study is to examine user experience with electronic medication adherence products, with particular emphasis on features, usefulness, and preferences. Methods Older adults, caregivers, and health care providers tested the usability of 22 electronic medication adherence products. After testing 5 products, participants were invited to participate in a one-on-one interview to investigate their perceptions and experiences with the features, usefulness, and preference for electronic medication adherence products tested. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using exploratory inductive coding to generate themes. The first 13 interviews were independently coded by 2 researchers. The percentage agreement and Cohen kappa after analyzing those interviews were 79% and 0.79, respectively. A single researcher analyzed the remaining interviews. Results Of the 37 participants, 21 (57%) were older adults, 5 (14%) were caregivers, and 11 (30%) were health care providers. The themes and subthemes generated from the qualitative analysis included product factors (subthemes: simplicity and product features, including availability and usability of alarms, portability, restricted access to medications, and storage capacity) and user factors (subthemes: sentiment, affordability, physical and cognitive capability, and technology literacy and learnability). Conclusions Electronic medication adherence products have the potential to enable independent medication management in older adults. The choice of a particular product should be made after considering individual preferences for product features, affordability, and the sentiment of the users. Older adults, caregivers, and health care providers prefer electronic medication adherence products that are simple to set up and use, are portable, have easy-to-access medication compartments, are secure, and have adequate storage capacity.

For persons who are at risk for, or living with, dementia exercise is recommended, yet many become or remain inactive. Exercise providers play a vital role in promoting and facilitating exercise in these groups by recognizing and being responsive to the needs of persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia in exercise programming. The objective of this study was to explore the experiences, perceptions, and needs of community exercise providers regarding dementia. Materials & methods Five focus groups were held with community exercise providers (n = 30) who deliver exercise to older adults (�55 years) in municipal, non-profit, for profit, or academic settings. Results Three themes were developed: (1) Unique experiences and diverse perceptions: suggests unique personal experiences with MCI and dementia inform distinct perceptions of dementia; (2) Dementia-Inclusive Practices: learning as you go and adapting for the individual: reflects exercise providers' approaches to recognizing and accommodating individuals' unique abilities and preferences; (3) Training and Best Practices, with Flexibility: identifies exercise providers' desires for MCI-and dementia-specific knowledge and training strategies, which need to recognize dementia heterogeneity between and within persons over time. Conclusions These findings highlight a willingness of exercise providers to support dementia-inclusive exercise, but recognize they have minimal training and lack educational resources to do so.

Background/objectives: The ability to manage medications independently may be affected in older adults due to physical and cognitive limitations. Numerous electronic medication adherence products (eMAPs) are available to aid medication management. Unfortunately, there are no available guidelines to support clinicians in recommending eMAPs. The objective of this study was to create and validate a clinician tool to guide use of eMAPs. Methods: Pharmacists who previously tested the usability of the eMAPs participated in a focus group to provide feedback on 5 metrics of the clinician guide: unassisted task completion, efficiency, usability, workload and an overall eMAP score. Participants were asked semistructured questions on how they would use the tool to inform recommendations of medication aids to patients. The discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and qualitatively analyzed. The clinician guide was modified to reflect feedback. Results: Five pharmacists (80% female, mean years of practice: 15.8) participated in the focus group. The clinician guide was modified by removing 2 metrics and adding an additional 8 metrics: maximum number of alarms, number of days the product can accommodate for based on a daily dosing regimen, price, monthly subscription, portability, locking feature, average time to set the device and number of steps required to set the device. The definition and calculation for unassisted task completion were modified. Additional instructions and specific patient case examples were also included in the final clinician guide. Conclusion: Since significant variability exists between eMAPs, it is imperative to have a tool for frontline clinicians to use when appropriately recommending the use of these products for medication management in older adults.

Background: For older adults, the capacity to self-manage medications may be limited by several factors. However, currently available tools do not permit a comprehensive assessment of such limitations. The Domain Specific Limitation in Medication Management Capacity (DSL-MMC) was developed to address this need. This study aimed to establish the face and content validity of the DSL-MMC. Methods: The DSL-MMC tool consisted of 4 domains and 12 sub-domains with 42 items including: 1. physical abilities (vision, dexterity, hearing); 2. cognition (comprehension, memory, executive functioning); 3. medication regimen complexity (dosing regimen, non-oral administration, polypharmacy); and 4. access/caregiver (prescription refill, new prescription, caregiver). Pharmacists assessed each item for relevance, importance, readability, understandability, and representation. Items with content validity index (CVI) scores of <0.80 for relevance were examined for revision or removal. Results: Twelve pharmacists participated in the study. CVI scores for relevance and importance of domains were 1.0; of the sub-domains, two were below 0.80. Among the 42 items, 35 (83%) and 30 (71%) maintained CVI scores above 0.80 for relevance and importance, respectively. Five items were removed, three were merged and seven were modified due to low CVI scores and/or feedback. Conclusion: The DSL-MMC has been validated for content.