ABSTRACT
Objective This systematic review aims to describe the involvement of persons with epilepsy (PWE), healthcare professionals (HP) and caregivers (CG) in the design and development of medical devices is epilepsy.
Methods A systematic review was conducted, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligibility criteria included peer-reviewed research focusing on medical devices for epilepsy management, involving users (PWE, CG, and HP) during the MDD process. Searches were performed on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, and a total of 55 relevant articles were identified and reviewed.
Results From 1999 to 2023, there was a gradual increase in the number of publications related to user involvement in epilepsy medical device development (MDD), highlighting the growing interest in this field. The medical devices involved in these studies encompassed a range of seizure detection tools, healthcare information systems, vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and electroencephalogram (EEG) technologies reflecting the emphasis on seizure detection, prediction, and prevention. PWE and CG were the primary users involved, underscoring the importance of their perspectives. Surveys, usability testing, interviews, and focus groups were the methods employed for capturing user perspectives. User involvement occurs in four out of the five stages of MDD, with production being the exception.
Significance User involvement in the MDD process for epilepsy management is an emerging area of interest holding a significant promise for improving device quality and patient outcomes. This review highlights the need for broader and more effective user involvement, as it currently lags in the development of commercially available medical devices for epilepsy management. Future research should explore the benefits and barriers of user involvement to enhance medical device technologies for epilepsy.
Plain Language Summary This review covers studies that have involved users in the development process of medical devices for epilepsy. The studies reported here have focused on getting input from people with epilepsy, their caregivers, and healthcare providers. These devices include tools for detecting seizures, stimulating nerves, and tracking brain activity. Most user feedback was gathered through surveys, usability tests, interviews, and focus groups. Users were involved in nearly every stage of device development except production. The review highlights that involving users can improve device quality and patient outcomes, but more effective involvement is needed in commercial device development. Future research should focus on the benefits and challenges of user involvement.
Key Point Box
- PWE are the users more involved in the MDD process;
- Surveys and usability testing are the methods more frequently used for user involvement in the MDD process in epilepsy;
- Literature only discloses the involvement of users in the MDD process of 13 commercially available medical devices for epilepsy management.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This systematic review was funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (EISMEA).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This is a systematic review
