Xiaomei Wang1, Tracy C Kim2, Sudeep Hegde1, Daniel J Hoffman2, Natalie C Benda2, Ella S Franklin2, David Lavergne3, Shawna J Perry4, Rollin J Fairbanks2, A Zachary Hettinger2, Emilie M Roth5, Ann M Bisantz1. 1. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, New York, United States. 2. National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, MedStar Institute for Innovation, MedStar Health, Washington, District of Columbia, United States. 3. Smart Information Flow Technologies, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Florida, Jacksonville, Florida, United States. 5. Roth Cognitive Engineering, Stanford, California, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital emergency departments (EDs) are dynamic environments, involving coordination and shared decision making by staff who care for multiple patients simultaneously. While computerized information systems have been widely adopted in such clinical environments, serious issues have been raised related to their usability and effectiveness. In particular, there is a need to support clinicians to communicate and maintain awareness of a patient's health status, and progress through the ED plan of care. OBJECTIVE: This study used work-centered usability methods to evaluate an integrated patient-focused status display designed to support ED clinicians' communication and situation awareness regarding a patient's health status and progress through their ED plan of care. The display design was informed by previous studies we conducted examining the information and cognitive support requirements of ED providers and nurses. METHODS: ED nurse and provider participants were presented various scenarios requiring patient-prioritization and care-planning tasks to be performed using the prototype display. Participants rated the display in terms of its cognitive support, usability, and usefulness. Participants' performance on the various tasks, and their feedback on the display design and utility, was analyzed. RESULTS: Participants provided ratings for usability and usefulness for the display sections using a work-centered usability questionnaire-mean scores for nurses and providers were 7.56 and 6.6 (1 being lowest and 9 being highest), respectively. General usability scores, based on the System Usability Scale tool, were rated as acceptable or marginally acceptable. Similarly, participants also rated the display highly in terms of support for specific cognitive objectives. CONCLUSION: A novel patient-focused status display for emergency medicine was evaluated via a simulation-based study in terms of work-centered usability and usefulness. Participants' subjective ratings of usability, usefulness, and support for cognitive objectives were encouraging. These findings, including participants' qualitative feedback, provided insights for improving the design of the display. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
BACKGROUND: Hospital emergency departments (EDs) are dynamic environments, involving coordination and shared decision making by staff who care for multiple patients simultaneously. While computerized information systems have been widely adopted in such clinical environments, serious issues have been raised related to their usability and effectiveness. In particular, there is a need to support clinicians to communicate and maintain awareness of a patient's health status, and progress through the ED plan of care. OBJECTIVE: This study used work-centered usability methods to evaluate an integrated patient-focused status display designed to support ED clinicians' communication and situation awareness regarding a patient's health status and progress through their ED plan of care. The display design was informed by previous studies we conducted examining the information and cognitive support requirements of ED providers and nurses. METHODS: ED nurse and provider participants were presented various scenarios requiring patient-prioritization and care-planning tasks to be performed using the prototype display. Participants rated the display in terms of its cognitive support, usability, and usefulness. Participants' performance on the various tasks, and their feedback on the display design and utility, was analyzed. RESULTS:Participants provided ratings for usability and usefulness for the display sections using a work-centered usability questionnaire-mean scores for nurses and providers were 7.56 and 6.6 (1 being lowest and 9 being highest), respectively. General usability scores, based on the System Usability Scale tool, were rated as acceptable or marginally acceptable. Similarly, participants also rated the display highly in terms of support for specific cognitive objectives. CONCLUSION: A novel patient-focused status display for emergency medicine was evaluated via a simulation-based study in terms of work-centered usability and usefulness. Participants' subjective ratings of usability, usefulness, and support for cognitive objectives were encouraging. These findings, including participants' qualitative feedback, provided insights for improving the design of the display. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
Authors: Nicolette McGeorge; Sudeep Hegde; Rebecca L Berg; Theresa K Guarrera-Schick; David T LaVergne; Sabrina N Casucci; A Zachary Hettinger; Lindsey N Clark; Li Lin; Rollin J Fairbanks; Natalie C Benda; Longsheng Sun; Robert L Wears; Shawna Perry; Ann Bisantz Journal: J Cogn Eng Decis Mak Date: 2015-12
Authors: Lindsey N Clark; Natalie C Benda; Sudeep Hegde; Nicolette M McGeorge; Theresa K Guarrera-Schick; A Zachary Hettinger; David T LaVergne; Shawna J Perry; Robert L Wears; Rollin J Fairbanks; Ann M Bisantz Journal: Appl Ergon Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Mark W Friedberg; Kristin Van Busum; Richard Wexler; Megan Bowen; Eric C Schneider Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Allan F Simpao; Luis M Ahumada; Beatriz Larru Martinez; Ana M Cardenas; Talene A Metjian; Kaede V Sullivan; Jorge A Gálvez; Bimal R Desai; Mohamed A Rehman; Jeffrey S Gerber Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Brian P Jenssen; Dean J Karavite; Shannon Kelleher; Ekaterina Nekrasova; Jeritt G Thayer; Raj Ratwani; Judy Shea; Emara Nabi-Burza; Jeremy E Drehmer; Jonathan P Winickoff; Robert W Grundmeier; Robert A Schnoll; Alexander G Fiks Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Pascale Carayon; Bat-Zion Hose; Abigail Wooldridge; Thomas B Brazelton; Shannon M Dean; Ben L Eithun; Michelle M Kelly; Jonathan E Kohler; Joshua Ross; Deborah A Rusy; Peter L T Hoonakker Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2022-03-02 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Jessica S Ancker; Natalie C Benda; Madhu Reddy; Kim M Unertl; Tiffany Veinot Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2021-11-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Jeritt G Thayer; Daria F Ferro; Jeffrey M Miller; Dean Karavite; Robert W Grundmeier; Levon Utidjian; Joseph J Zorc Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 4.497