Assessing the Usability of a Clinical Decision Support System: Heuristic Evaluation

被引:16
作者
Cho, Hwayoung [1 ]
Keenan, Gail [1 ]
Madandola, Olatunde O. [1 ]
Dos Santos, Fabiana Cristina [1 ]
Macieira, Tamara G. R. [1 ]
Bjarnadottir, Ragnhildur, I [1 ]
Priola, Karen J. B. [1 ]
Lopez, Karen Dunn [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Coll Nursing, 1225 Ctr Dr, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
[2] Univ Iowa, Coll Nursing, Iowa City, IA USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
usability; heuristic; clinical decision support; electronic health record; expert review; evaluation; user interface; human-computer interaction; HEALTH-CARE; NURSES; PHYSICIANS;
D O I
10.2196/31758
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Poor usability is a primary cause of unintended consequences related to the use of electronic health record (EHR) systems, which negatively impacts patient safety. Due to the cost and time needed to carry out iterative evaluations, many EHR components, such as clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), have not undergone rigorous usability testing prior to their deployment in clinical practice. Usability testing in the predeployment phase is crucial to eliminating usability issues and preventing costly fixes that will be needed if these issues are found after the system's implementation. Objective: This study presents an example application of a systematic evaluation method that uses clinician experts with human-computer interaction (HCI) expertise to evaluate the usability of an electronic clinical decision support (CDS) intervention prior to its deployment in a randomized controlled trial. Methods: We invited 6 HCI experts to participate in a heuristic evaluation of our CDS intervention. Each expert was asked to independently explore the intervention at least twice. After completing the assigned tasks using patient scenarios, each expert completed a heuristic evaluation checklist developed by Bright et al based on Nielsen's 10 heuristics. The experts also rated the overall severity of each identified heuristic violation on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0 indicates no problems and 4 indicates a usability catastrophe. Data from the experts' coded comments were synthesized, and the severity of each identified usability heuristic was analyzed. Results: The 6 HCI experts included professionals from the fields of nursing (n=4), pharmaceutical science (n=1), and systems engineering (n=1). The mean overall severity scores of the identified heuristic violations ranged from 0.66 (flexibility and efficiency of use) to 2.00 (user control and freedom and error prevention), in which scores closer to 0 indicate a more usable system. The heuristic principle user control and freedom was identified as the most in need of refinement and, particularly by nonnursing HCI experts, considered as having major usability problems. In response to the heuristic match between system and the real world, the experts pointed to the reversed direction of our system's pain scale scores (1=severe pain) compared to those commonly used in clinical practice (typically 1=mild pain); although this was identified as a minor usability problem, its refinement was repeatedly emphasized by nursing HCI experts. Conclusions: Our heuristic evaluation process is simple and systematic and can be used at multiple stages of system development to reduce the time and cost needed to establish the usability of a system before its widespread implementation. Furthermore, heuristic evaluations can help organizations develop transparent reporting protocols for usability, as required by Title IV of the 21st Century Cures Act. Testing of EHRs and CDSSs by clinicians with HCI expertise in heuristic evaluation processes has the potential to reduce the frequency of testing while increasing its quality, which may reduce clinicians' cognitive workload and errors and enhance the adoption of EHRs and CDSSs.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]  
21st Century Cures Act, 2016, PUBLIC LAW 114 255
[2]   Usability meanings and interpretations in ISO standards [J].
Abran, A ;
Khelifi, A ;
Suryn, W ;
Seffah, A .
SOFTWARE QUALITY JOURNAL, 2003, 11 (04) :325-338
[3]   Problems in recruiting community-based physicians for health services research [J].
Asch, S ;
Connor, SE ;
Hamilton, EG ;
Fox, SA .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2000, 15 (08) :591-599
[4]  
Boehm BW, 2001, PIONEERS THEIR CONTR, P99, DOI [10.1007/978-3-642-48354-7, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-48354-7]
[5]  
Bright Tiffani J, 2006, AMIA Annu Symp Proc, P864
[6]   Overcoming Barriers to the Recruitment of Nurses as Participants in Health Care Research [J].
Broyles, Lauren Matukaitis ;
Rodriguez, Keri L. ;
Price, Patrice A. ;
Bayliss, Nichole K. ;
Sevick, Mary Ann .
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 2011, 21 (12) :1705-1718
[7]  
Butcher H.K., 2018, Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC)-E-Book
[8]   Usability of a Consumer Health Informatics Tool Following Completion of a Clinical Trial: Focus Group Study [J].
Cho, Hwayoung ;
Porras, Tiffany ;
Flyn, Gabriella ;
Schnall, Rebecca .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2020, 22 (06)
[9]   A Mobile Health Intervention for HIV Prevention Among Racially and Ethnically Diverse Young Men: Usability Evaluation [J].
Cho, Hwayoung ;
Powell, Dakota ;
Pichon, Adrienne ;
Thai, Jennie ;
Bruce, Josh ;
Kuhns, Lisa M. ;
Garofalo, Robert ;
Schnall, Rebecca .
JMIR MHEALTH AND UHEALTH, 2018, 6 (09)
[10]   A multi-level usability evaluation of mobile health applications: A case study [J].
Cho, Hwayoung ;
Yen, Po-Yin ;
Dowding, Dawn ;
Merrill, Jacqueline A. ;
Schnall, Rebecca .
JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2018, 86 :79-89