Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2018; 57(05/06): 243-252
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1675822
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Self-Anamnesis with a Conversational User Interface: Concept and Usability Study

Kerstin Denecke
1   Institute for Medical Informatics, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland
,
Sandra Lutz Hochreutener
2   Department of Music, Zurich University of the Arts, Zurich, Switzerland
,
Annkathrin Pöpel
3   Center of Psychosomatic, Sanatorium Kilchberg AG, Kilchberg, Switzerland
,
Richard May
1   Institute for Medical Informatics, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

18 April 2018

24 July 2018

Publication Date:
15 March 2019 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Self-anamnesis is a procedure in which a patient answers questions about the personal medical history without interacting directly with a doctor or medical assistant. If collected digitally, the anamnesis data can be shared among the health care team. In this article, we introduce a concept for digital anamnesis collection and assess the applicability of a conversational user interface (CUI) for realizing a mobile self-anamnesis application.

Materials and Methods We implemented our concept for self-anamnesis for the concrete field of music therapy. We collected requirements with respect to the application from music therapists and by reviewing the literature. A rule-based approach was chosen for realizing the anamnesis conversation between the system and the user. The Artificial Intelligence Markup Language was exploited for encapsulating the questions and responses of the system. For studying the quality of the system and analyzing performance, humanity, effect, and accessibility of the system, we performed a usability test with 22 persons.

Results The current version of the self-anamnesis application is equipped with 63 questions on the music biography of a patient that are asked subsequently to the user by means of a chatbot conversation. The usability study showed that a CUI is a practical way for collecting anamnesis data. Users felt engaged of answering the questions and liked the human characteristics of the chatbot. They suggested to extend the conversation capabilities of the chatbot so that the system can react appropriately, in particular when the user is not feeling well.

Conclusions We could demonstrate the applicability of a CUI for collecting anamnesis data. In contrast to digital anamnesis questionnaires, the application of a CUI provides several benefits: the user can be encouraged to complete all queries and can ask clarifying questions in case something is unclear.

Keywords

intelligent assistant - patient empowerment - self-anamnesis - patient safety - AIML - conversational user interface
 

  • References

  • 1 Kassirer JP. Imperatives, expediency, and the new diagnosis. Diagnosis (Berl) 2014; 1 (01) 11-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Moonen PJ, Mercelina L, Boer W, Fret T. Diagnostic error in the emergency department: follow up of patients with minor trauma in the outpatient clinic. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2017; 25 (01) 13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Davenport S, Goldberg D, Millar T. How psychiatric disorders are missed during medical consultations. Lancet 1987; 2 (8556): 439-441
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Palermo TM, Valenzuela D, Stork PP. A randomized trial of electronic versus paper pain diaries in children: impact on compliance, accuracy, and acceptability. Pain 2004; 107 (03) 213-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hayna S, Schmücker P. e-Anamnese ein einrichtungs-, sektoren- und berufsgruppen-übergreifender Lösungsansatz für die Elektronische Anamnese. Telemedizinführer Deutschland; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Tiplady B, Crompton GK, Dewar MH. , et al. The use of electronic diaries in respiratory studies. Drug Inf J 1997; 31: 759-764
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dale O, Hagen KB. Despite technical problems personal digital assistants outperform pen and paper when collecting patient diary data. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60 (01) 8-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Zakim D. Development and significance of automated history-taking software for clinical medicine, clinical research and basic medical science. J Intern Med 2016; 280 (03) 287-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Slack WV, Kowaloff HB, Davis RB. , et al. Evaluation of computer-based medical histories taken by patients at home. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012; 19 (04) 545-548
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 de Hoog CL, Portegijs PJ, Stoffers HE. Family history tools for primary care are not ready yet to be implemented. A systematic review. Eur J Gen Pract 2014; 20 (02) 125-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Benaroia M, Elinson R, Zarnke K. Patient-directed intelligent and interactive computer medical history-gathering systems: a utility and feasibility study in the emergency department. Int J Med Inform 2007; 76 (04) 283-288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tsvetkova M, García-Gavilanes R, Floridi L, Yasseri T. Even good bots fight: the case of Wikipedia. PLoS One 2017; 12 (02) e0171774
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Weizenbaum J. Eliza - a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Commun ACM 1966; 9 (01) 36-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fadhil A, Gabrielli S. Addressing challenges in healthy lifestyles: the Al-chatbot approach. In: Proceedings of the 11th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, PervasiveHealth '17. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2017:261–265
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lokman AS, Zain JM. An architectural design of virtual dietitian (vidi) for diabetic patients. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology; 2009:408–411
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kerfoot BP, Baker H, Jackson TL. , et al. A multi-institutional randomized controlled trial of adjuvant Web-based teaching to medical students. Acad Med 2006; 81 (03) 224-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Tschanz M, Dorner TL, Denecke K. eMedication meets eHealth with the electronic medication management assistant (eMMA). Stud Health Technol Inform 2017; 236: 196-203
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Bunt L, Stige B. Music Therapy: An Art Beyond Words. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Sherratt K, Thornton A, Hatton C. Music interventions for people with dementia: a review of the literature. Aging Ment Health 2004; 8 (01) 3-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Tan X, Yowler CJ, Super DM, Fratianne RB. The efficacy of music therapy protocols for decreasing pain, anxiety, and muscle tension levels during burn dressing changes: a prospective randomized crossover trial. J Burn Care Res 2010; 31 (04) 590-597
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Zeitler W. Auditive Music Therapy. Hamburg: tredition; 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Saarikallio S, Gold C, McFerran K. Development and validation of the healthy-unhealthy music scale. Child Adolesc Ment Health 2015; 20 (04) 210-217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Spychiger M. Das musikalische Selbstkonzept. Wer ich bin und was ich kann in der Musik. Schott Musikpädagogik GmbH, Üben und Musizieren, 6(13):18–21, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Frohne-Hagemann I. Das musikalische Lebenspanorama (mlp): Narrative Praxis und inszenierende Improvisation in der integrativen Musiktherapie. Fenster zur Musiktherapie, page 1; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 25 das Gracas M, Marietto B, Varago de Aguiar R. , et al. Artificial intelligence markup language: a brief tutorial; 2013 . Available at: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.3091.pdf
    PubMed
  • 26 AIML 2.0 Working Draft, Revision 1.0.2.22; 2014 . Available at: https://gist.github.com/onlurking/f6431e672cfa202c09a7c7cf92ac8a8b . Accessed October 26, 2018
    PubMed
  • 27 Radziwill NM, Benton MC. Evaluating quality of chatbots and intelligent conversational agents. CoRR, abs/1704.04579; 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Abran A, Khelifi A, Suryn W, Seffah A. Consolidating the ISO usability models. In: 11th International Software Quality Management Conference and the 8th Annual INSPIRE Conference; 2003
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Bachman JW. The patient-computer interview: a neglected tool that can aid the clinician. Mayo Clin Proc 2003; 78 (01) 67-78
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Schulman D, Bickmore T. Persuading users through counseling dialogue with a conversational agent. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, Persuasive '09. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2009 :25:1–25:8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Ravishankar K. The art of history-taking in a headache patient. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2012; 15 (Suppl. 01) S7-S14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Denecke K. A mobile system for music anamnesis and receptive music therapy in the personal home. Stud Health Technol Inform 2017; 245: 54-58
    PubMedGoogle Scholar