# Usability of a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Administered by Medical Assistants in General Practice: Implementation Study

**Authors:** Philipp Schaper, Alexander Hanke, Stephan Jonas, Leon Nissen, Lara Marie Reimer, Florian Schweizer, Michael Wagner, Kristin Rolke, Carolin Rosendahl, Judith Tillmann, Klaus Weckbecker, Jochen René Thyrian

PMC · DOI: 10.2196/76010 · JMIR Formative Research · 2025-12-22

## TL;DR

This study evaluated how well a digital cognitive test, the MoCA Duo, can be used by older adults in general practice, finding it to be usable and effective for assessing cognitive status.

## Contribution

The study provides empirical evidence on the usability of a digital cognitive test in general practice, emphasizing the influence of cognitive status and age.

## Key findings

- 64% of patients felt they could perform the test to the best of their ability, influenced by their MoCA scores.
- Patients with better MoCA scores and younger age reported higher usability ratings.
- Perceived workload was medium, and both patient and MA assessments were influenced by MoCA scores and age.

## Abstract

Digital short cognitive tests administered by medical assistants (MAs) in general practitioners’ (GPs) practices have great potential for the timely identification of patients with dementia, because they can lead to targeted specialist referrals or to immediate reassurance of patients regarding their perceived concerns. However, integration of this testing approach into clinical practice requires good usability for the test itself, especially for cognitively impaired older adults.

In this implementation study, the digital version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Duo was conducted by MAs in general practice. We tested if the interaction with the test is associated with usability problems for the patients and aimed to find additional relevant constructs that should be considered for the potential implementation of such digital tests into clinical practice. We focused the study on subjective success, usability, and workload as well as their association with the result of the cognitive test to assess whether the MoCA Duo can be implemented into general practice.

In total, 10 GPs took part in the study. Within their practices, 299 GP patients (aged 51-97 years) with cognitive concerns completed the MoCA Duo administered by MAs. Subsequently, patients and MAs completed digital questionnaires regarding the interaction with the app. Usability was measured using the adapted System Usability Scale, and perceived workload using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index. For the perceived workload, we included an assessment of the patient by the MA. Results of the MoCA Duo were supplied to the GPs for their consultation with the patient.

The results indicated good usability for the MoCA Duo. Self-assessment by the patients indicated that 64% (191/299) could perform in the test to the best of their ability, affected by their MoCA score. We found significant higher usability ratings by patients with better MoCA scores as well as by younger patients. Furthermore, the perceived workload showed overall medium workload. We found significant correlations between the subjective perceived workload of the patients and the assessment by MAs. Self-assessments as well as assessments by the MAs were significantly influenced by the MoCA scores and the age of the participants.

The results indicate good usability of the digital MoCA within the sample, supporting the idea that the resulting scores are adequate to assess cognitive status without dependence on technological affinity. Furthermore, the results highlight the relevance of heterogenous samples for comparable evaluation studies, based on the significant effect of cognitive status and age on usability and workload.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** dementia (MONDO:0001627)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** dementia (MESH:D003704), cognitive concerns (MESH:D003072)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12770926/full.md

## Figures

1 figure with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12770926/full.md

## References

45 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12770926/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12770926