Clinical Utility and Usability of the Digital Box and Block Test: Mixed Methods Study.
Eveline Prochaska, Elske Ammenwerth
PMID 38786981WHAT IT FOUND
Four occupational therapists rated a digital Box and Block Test prototype as more professional and easier to evaluate than the wooden version, though bulkier to transport.
They suggested softer block edges and audible end-of-test signals.
Key findings
01Therapists rated the digital test as having higher acceptance and professionalism than the original wooden Box and Block Test.
02Participants identified three specific usability issues: sharp block edges, a visual-only end signal that was often missed, and a distracting live display.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only four occupational therapists, all female and aged 21-30, which limits the generalizability of the findings to the broader profession. The evaluation took place in a controlled laboratory setting, not a real clinical environment, which may not reflect actual workflow challenges. Patients were not involved in the study due to ethical restrictions on early-stage prototypes, so the patient experience of the test is unknown. Data collection and analysis were performed by a single researcher who was involved in the development of the dBBT, introducing potential bias. The results reflect first-time use of the prototype; perceptions of usability may change with repeated exposure.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. However, the lead researcher (EP) had collaborated with the occupational therapy department on the development of the dBBT, which is noted as a limitation in the text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the high usability scores or positive therapist feedback as evidence that the digital test improves patient outcomes or is ready for clinical use. This was a small, single-site pilot with a prototype device, and the study did not assess the test's accuracy or impact on therapy.