Literature DB >> 32743757

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

Thomas J Reese1, Noa Segall2, Guilherme Del Fiol3, Joseph E Tonna4, Kensaku Kawamoto3, Charlene Weir3, Melanie C Wright5.   

Abstract

Conventional electronic health record information displays are not optimized for efficient information processing. Graphical displays that integrate patient information can improve information processing, especially in data-rich environments such as critical care. We propose an adaptable and reusable approach to patient information display with modular graphical components (widgets). We had two study objectives. First, reduce numerous widget prototype alternatives to preferred designs. Second, derive widget design feature recommendations. Using iterative human-centered design methods, we interviewed experts to hone design features of widgets displaying frequently measured data elements, e.g., heart rate, for acute care patient monitoring and real-time clinical decision-making. Participant responses to design queries were coded to calculate feature-set agreement, average prototype score, and prototype agreement. Two iterative interview cycles covering 64 design queries and 86 prototypes were needed to reach consensus on six feature sets. Interviewers agreed that line graphs with a smoothed or averaged trendline, 24-h timeframe, and gradient coloring for urgency were useful and informative features. Moreover, users agreed that widgets should include key functions: (1) adjustable reference ranges, (2) expandable timeframes, and (3) access to details on demand. Participants stated graphical widgets would be used to identify correlating patterns and compare abnormal measures across related data elements at a specific time. Combining theoretical principles and validated design methods was an effective and reproducible approach to designing widgets for healthcare displays. The findings suggest our widget design features and recommendations match critical care clinician expectations for graphical information display of continuous and frequently updated patient data.
© 2020. Springer Nature B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Critical care; Data integration; Graphical display; Medical informatics applications; Participatory design

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32743757      PMCID: PMC7854828          DOI: 10.1007/s10877-020-00571-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   1.977


  39 in total

1.  Calculating percentage agreement correctly but writing its formula incorrectly.

Authors:  J Araujo; D G Born
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  1985

2.  Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data.

Authors:  W S Cleveland; R McGill
Journal:  Science       Date:  1985-08-30       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The impact of a highly visible display of cerebral perfusion pressure on outcome in individuals with cerebral aneurysms.

Authors:  Catherine J Kirkness; Robert L Burr; Kevin C Cain; David W Newell; Pamela H Mitchell
Journal:  Heart Lung       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.210

4.  Novel displays of patient information in critical care settings: a systematic review.

Authors:  Rosalie G Waller; Melanie C Wright; Noa Segall; Paige Nesbitt; Thomas Reese; Damian Borbolla; Guilherme Del Fiol
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  The design and evaluation of a graphical display for laboratory data.

Authors:  David T Bauer; Stephanie Guerlain; Patrick J Brown
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Electronic Health Record Usability Issues and Potential Contribution to Patient Harm.

Authors:  Jessica L Howe; Katharine T Adams; A Zachary Hettinger; Raj M Ratwani
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Toward Designing Information Display to Support Critical Care. A Qualitative Contextual Evaluation and Visioning Effort.

Authors:  Melanie C Wright; Sherry Dunbar; Brekk C Macpherson; Eugene W Moretti; Guillherme Del Fiol; Jean Bolte; Jeffrey M Taekman; Noa Segall
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 2.342

8.  Hemodynamic variables related to outcome in septic shock.

Authors:  Marjut Varpula; Minna Tallgren; Katri Saukkonen; Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki; Ville Pettilä
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-06-23       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Effect of a rapid response system for patients in shock on time to treatment and mortality during 5 years.

Authors:  Frank Sebat; Amjad A Musthafa; David Johnson; Andrew A Kramer; Debbie Shoffner; Mark Eliason; Kristen Henry; Bruce Spurlock
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 7.598

10.  SMART on FHIR: a standards-based, interoperable apps platform for electronic health records.

Authors:  Joshua C Mandel; David A Kreda; Kenneth D Mandl; Isaac S Kohane; Rachel B Ramoni
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.