Literature DB >> 28088527

Navigation in the electronic health record: A review of the safety and usability literature.

Lisette C Roman1, Jessica S Ancker2, Stephen B Johnson3, Yalini Senathirajah4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Inefficient navigation in electronic health records has been shown to increase users' cognitive load, which may increase potential for errors, reduce efficiency, and increase fatigue. However, navigation has received insufficient recognition and attention in the electronic health record (EHR) literature as an independent construct and contributor to overall usability. Our aims in this literature review were to (1) assess the prevalence of navigation-related topics within the EHR usability and safety research literature, (2) categorize types of navigation actions within the EHR, (3) capture relationships between these navigation actions and usability principles, and (4) collect terms and concepts related to EHR navigation. Our goal was to improve access to navigation-related research in usability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We applied scoping literature review search methods with the assistance of a reference librarian to identify articles published since 1996 that reported evaluation of the usability or safety of an EHR user interface via user test, analytic methods, or inspection methods. The 4336 references collected from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Engineering Village, and expert referrals were de-duplicated and screened for relevance, and navigation-related concepts were abstracted from the 21 articles eligible for review using a standard abstraction form.
RESULTS: Of the 21 eligible articles, 20 (95%) mentioned navigation in results and discussion of usability evaluations. Navigation between pages of the EHR was the more frequently documented type of navigation (86%) compared to navigation within a single page (14%). Navigation actions (e.g., scrolling through a medication list) were frequently linked to specific usability heuristic violations, among which flexibility and efficiency of use, recognition rather than recall, and error prevention were most common. DISCUSSION: Discussion of navigation was prevalent in results across all types of evaluation methods among the articles reviewed. Navigating between multiple screens was frequently identified as a usability barrier. The lack of standard terminology created some challenges to identifying and comparing articles.
CONCLUSION: We observed that usability researchers are frequently capturing navigation-related issues even in articles that did not explicitly state navigation as a focus. Capturing and synthesizing the literature on navigation is challenging because of the lack of uniform vocabulary. Navigation is a potential target for normative recommendations for improved interaction design for safer systems. Future research in this domain, including development of normative recommendations for usability design and evaluation, will be facilitated by development of a standard terminology for describing EHR navigation.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Electronic health record; Navigation; Safety; Scoping review; Usability

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28088527     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2017.01.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Inform        ISSN: 1532-0464            Impact factor:   6.317


  25 in total

1.  Six habits of highly successful health information technology: powerful strategies for design and implementation.

Authors:  Jessica M Ray; Raj M Ratwani; Christine A Sinsky; Richard M Frankel; Mark W Friedberg; Seth M Powsner; David I Rosenthal; Robert M Wachter; Edward R Melnick
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  We're Lost, But We are Making Good Time: Navigating Complex Pathways in a Patient-Order Management Task.

Authors:  Benjamin J Duncan; Alexandra N Kassis; David R Kaufman; Adela Grando; Karl A Poterack; Rick A Helmers; Timothy K Miksch; Lu Zheng; Bradley N Doebbeling
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2021-01-25

Review 3.  Nurse workarounds in the electronic health record: An integrative review.

Authors:  Dan Fraczkowski; Jeffrey Matson; Karen Dunn Lopez
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  The potential role of dashboard use and navigation in reducing medical errors of an electronic health record system: a mixed-method simulation handoff study.

Authors:  Danny T Y Wu; Smruti Deoghare; Zhe Shan; Karthikeyan Meganathan; Katherine Blondon
Journal:  Health Syst (Basingstoke)       Date:  2019-05-28

5.  A Daily Hospital Progress Note that Increases Physician Usability of the Electronic Health Record by Facilitating a Problem-Oriented Approach to the Patient and Reducing Physician Clerical Burden.

Authors:  James M Sutton; Steven R Ash; Akram Al Makki; Rabih Kalakeche
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2019-06-14

Review 6.  Electronic Medical Records for (Visceral) Medicine: An Overview of the Current Status and Prospects.

Authors:  Sven Kernebeck; Theresa Sophie Busse; Chantal Jux; Ulrich Bork; Jan P Ehlers
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2021-09-22

7.  The essence of healthcare records: embedded electronic health record system microblogging functionality for patient care narrative.

Authors:  Shankar Sridharan; Catherine Peters; Sarah Newcombe; Christopher Jephson; Robert Robinson; Bregje Mulder; William Houghton; Sheena Visram; Neil J Sebire
Journal:  Future Healthc J       Date:  2021-11

8.  Dashboard Design to Identify and Balance Competing Risk of Multiple Hospital-Acquired Conditions.

Authors:  Mary Beth Flynn Makic; Kathleen R Stevens; R Mark Gritz; Heidi Wald; Judith Ouellet; Cynthia Drake Morrow; David Rodrick; Blaine Reeder
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 2.762

9.  Why Is the Electronic Health Record So Challenging for Research and Clinical Care?

Authors:  John H Holmes; James Beinlich; Mary R Boland; Kathryn H Bowles; Yong Chen; Tessa S Cook; George Demiris; Michael Draugelis; Laura Fluharty; Peter E Gabriel; Robert Grundmeier; C William Hanson; Daniel S Herman; Blanca E Himes; Rebecca A Hubbard; Charles E Kahn; Dokyoon Kim; Ross Koppel; Qi Long; Nebojsa Mirkovic; Jeffrey S Morris; Danielle L Mowery; Marylyn D Ritchie; Ryan Urbanowicz; Jason H Moore
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 1.800

10.  Iterative heuristic design of temporal graphic displays with clinical domain experts.

Authors:  Thomas J Reese; Noa Segall; Guilherme Del Fiol; Joseph E Tonna; Kensaku Kawamoto; Charlene Weir; Melanie C Wright
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2020-08-02       Impact factor: 1.977

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.