Gretchen Hultman1, Jenna Marquard2, Elliot Arsoniadis3, Pamela Mink4, Rubina Rizvi1, Tim Ramer5, Saif Khairat6, Keri Fickau7, Genevieve B Melton8. 1. Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis, MN. 2. College of Engineering, University of Massachusetts Amherst , Amherst, MA. 3. Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. 4. Division of Applied Research, Allina Health , Minneapolis, MN. 5. Department of Family Medicine, University of Minnesota , Minneapolis, MN. 6. Carolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, NC. 7. Fairview Health Services , Minneapolis, MN. 8. Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Fairview Health Services, Minneapolis, MN.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite widespread electronic health record (EHR) adoption, poor EHR system usability continues to be a significant barrier to effective system use for end users. One key to addressing usability problems is to employ user testing and user-centered design. OBJECTIVES: To understand if redesigning an EHR-based navigation tool with clinician input improved user performance and satisfaction. METHODS: A usability evaluation was conducted to compare two versions of a redesigned ambulatory navigator. Participants completed tasks for five patient cases using the navigators, while employing a think-aloud protocol. The tasks were based on Meaningful Use (MU) requirements. RESULTS: The version of navigator did not affect perceived workload, and time to complete tasks was longer in the redesigned navigator. A relatively small portion of navigator content was used to complete the MU-related tasks, though navigation patterns were highly variable across participants for both navigators. Preferences for EHR navigation structures appeared to be individualized. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of EHR usability assessments to evaluate group and individual performance of different interfaces and preferences for each design.
BACKGROUND: Despite widespread electronic health record (EHR) adoption, poor EHR system usability continues to be a significant barrier to effective system use for end users. One key to addressing usability problems is to employ user testing and user-centered design. OBJECTIVES: To understand if redesigning an EHR-based navigation tool with clinician input improved user performance and satisfaction. METHODS: A usability evaluation was conducted to compare two versions of a redesigned ambulatory navigator. Participants completed tasks for five patient cases using the navigators, while employing a think-aloud protocol. The tasks were based on Meaningful Use (MU) requirements. RESULTS: The version of navigator did not affect perceived workload, and time to complete tasks was longer in the redesigned navigator. A relatively small portion of navigator content was used to complete the MU-related tasks, though navigation patterns were highly variable across participants for both navigators. Preferences for EHR navigation structures appeared to be individualized. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of EHR usability assessments to evaluate group and individual performance of different interfaces and preferences for each design.
Entities:
Keywords:
Electronic health record; meaningful use; usability
Authors: Jason J Saleem; Mindy E Flanagan; Nancy R Wilck; Jim Demetriades; Bradley N Doebbeling Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Sally L Baxter; Helena E Gali; Michael F Chiang; Michelle R Hribar; Lucila Ohno-Machado; Robert El-Kareh; Abigail E Huang; Heather E Chen; Andrew S Camp; Don O Kikkawa; Bobby S Korn; Jeffrey E Lee; Christopher A Longhurst; Marlene Millen Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-02-19 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Saif Khairat; Cameron Coleman; Paige Ottmar; Thomas Bice; Ross Koppel; Shannon S Carson Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.497