A Collaborative Usability Evaluation (CUE) Model for Health IT Design and Implementation

Hundt, Ann Schoofs; Adams, Jean A.; Carayon, Pascale

doi:10.1080/10447318.2016.1263430

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the method's reliance on human factors expertise may limit its applicability and usefulness, especially regarding the evaluation of the severity of identified usability violations. In the domain of health care, usability violations can pose different levels of risk or harm to the patient; therefore, heuristic evaluation may require additional expertise besides human factors expertise [4,5]. One solution to this challenge is integrating other domains of expertise, such as clinical, patient and care partner, and IT expertise in the evaluation of a technology's usability.…”

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Usability of an Emergency Department After Visit Summary: Staged Heuristic Evaluation

Barton¹,

Salwei²,

Rutkowski³

et al. 2023

JMIR Hum Factors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Heuristic evaluations, while commonly used, may inadequately capture the severity of identified usability issues. In the domain of health care, usability issues can pose different levels of risk to patients. Incorporating diverse expertise (eg, clinical and patient) in the heuristic evaluation process can help assess and address potential negative impacts on patient safety that may otherwise go unnoticed. One document that should be highly usable for patients—with the potential to prevent adverse outcomes—is the after visit summary (AVS). The AVS is the document given to a patient upon discharge from the emergency department (ED), which contains instructions on how to manage symptoms, medications, and follow-up care. Objective This study aims to assess a multistage method for integrating diverse expertise (ie, clinical, an older adult care partner, and health IT) with human factors engineering (HFE) expertise in the usability evaluation of the patient-facing ED AVS. Methods We conducted a three-staged heuristic evaluation of an ED AVS using heuristics developed for use in evaluating patient-facing documentation. In stage 1, HFE experts reviewed the AVS to identify usability issues. In stage 2, 6 experts of varying expertise (ie, emergency medicine physicians, ED nurses, geriatricians, transitional care nurses, and an older adult care partner) rated each previously identified usability issue on its potential impact on patient comprehension and patient safety. Finally, in stage 3, an IT expert reviewed each usability issue to identify the likelihood of successfully addressing the issue. Results In stage 1, we identified 60 usability issues that violated a total of 108 heuristics. In stage 2, 18 additional usability issues that violated 27 heuristics were identified by the study experts. Impact ratings ranged from all experts rating the issue as “no impact” to 5 out of 6 experts rating the issue as having a “large negative impact.” On average, the older adult care partner representative rated usability issues as being more significant more of the time. In stage 3, 31 usability issues were rated by an IT professional as “impossible to address,” 21 as “maybe,” and 24 as “can be addressed.” Conclusions Integrating diverse expertise when evaluating usability is important when patient safety is at stake. The non-HFE experts, included in stage 2 of our evaluation, identified 23% (18/78) of all the usability issues and, depending on their expertise, rated those issues as having differing impacts on patient comprehension and safety. Our findings suggest that, to conduct a comprehensive heuristic evaluation, expertise from all the contexts in which the AVS is used must be considered. Combining those findings with ratings from an IT expert, usability issues can be strategically addressed through redesign. Thus, a 3-staged heuristic evaluation method offers a framework for integrating context-specific expertise efficiently, while providing practical insights to guide human-centered design.

show abstract

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Usability of an Emergency Department After Visit Summary: Staged Heuristic Evaluation

Barton¹,

Salwei²,

Rutkowski³

et al. 2023

JMIR Hum Factors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it is less suitable for contradictory or conflicting situations, especially when different stakeholders are being asked. In the area of e-health it has especially been applied for evaluating the compliance of services according to recognized usability principles [15][16][17].…”

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

All that Glitters is not Gold: Six Steps Before Selecting and Prioritizing e-Health Services

Mettler

Vimarlund

2017

J Med Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the market for e-health applications is constantly growing, it is getting an ever more complex endeavor to select and prioritize the right service offering given a particular situation. In examining the extant literature, it was revealed that little emphasis is actually placed on how to analyze contextual or environmental factors prior to the selection and prioritization of e-health services. With this paper, we therefore propose a formative framework consisting of six fundamental yet very pragmatic steps that may support decision makers in identifying the most important contextual pre-requisites that e-health services need to fulfill in order to be considered as effective for their environment to be implemented.

show abstract

“…usability) in designing health information technologies,(49) in particular among vendors,(50) including training of designers and implementers in human-centered design. (51) Designers and vendors of health information technologies should give more serious consideration to human-centered design and routine use of multiple HF/SE methods, including understanding of the actual work process, incorporation of usability techniques (e.g. heuristic evaluation) early in the design process, user testing in simulated environments, and monitoring of safety problems of technology-in-use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges And Opportunities For Improving Patient Safety Through Human Factors And Systems Engineering

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite progress on patient safety since the Institute of Medicine 1999 report “To Err is Human”, significant problems remain. Human factors and systems engineering (HF/SE) has been increasingly recognized and advocated for its value in understanding, improving, and redesigning processes for safer care, especially for complex interacting sociotechnical systems. Broad awareness and adoption of HF/SE into safety improvement work, however, has been frustratingly slow. We provide an overview of HF/SE, its demonstrated value to a wide range of patient safety problems, in particular medication safety, and challenges to its broader implementation across health care. We propose seven recommendations and policy implications to maximize the spread of HF/SE, including formal and informal education programs, greater adoption of HF/SE by healthcare organizations, expanded funding to foster greater clinician-engineer partnerships, and coordinated national efforts to design and operationalize a system for spreading HF/SE into health care nationally.

show abstract

A Collaborative Usability Evaluation (CUE) Model for Health IT Design and Implementation

Cited by 10 publications

References 13 publications

Evaluating the Usability of an Emergency Department After Visit Summary: Staged Heuristic Evaluation

Evaluating the Usability of an Emergency Department After Visit Summary: Staged Heuristic Evaluation

All that Glitters is not Gold: Six Steps Before Selecting and Prioritizing e-Health Services

Challenges And Opportunities For Improving Patient Safety Through Human Factors And Systems Engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About