Are three methods better than one? A comparative assessment of usability evaluation methods in an EHR.

Are three methods better than one? A comparative assessment of usability evaluation methods in an EHR.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.010
复制
发表时间:
2014-05
影响因子:
4.9
通讯作者:
Patel VL
Patel VL
中科院分区:
医学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Walji MF;Kalenderian E;Piotrowski M;Tran D;Kookal KK;Tokede O;White JM;Vaderhobli R;Ramoni R;Stark PC;Kimmes NS;Lagerweij M;Patel VL

文献摘要

参考文献

相似文献

为了比较评估三种不同的方法的有效性,涉及最终用户检测EHR中的可用性问题:用户测试,半结构化访谈和调查。数据收集在两个主要的城市牙科学校的教师,居民和牙科学生,以评估牙科电子病历的可用性,制定治疗计划。这些包括用户测试(N=32),半结构化访谈(N=36)和调查(N=35)。这三种方法总共确定了187个可用性违规:54%通过用户测试,28%通过半结构化访谈,18%通过调查方法,有适度的重叠。这些可用性问题被分为3大类24个问题主题。用户测试涵盖了最广泛的主题(83%),其次是访谈(63%)和调查(29%)方法。多种评估方法为识别EHR可用性挑战和具体问题提供了一种全面的方法。这三种方法被认为是互补的,因此每种方法都可以为软件增强提供独特的见解。访谈和调查方法被认为是不够的,但当与用户测试方法结合使用时,他们提供了一个全面的评估EHR。我们建议在测试卫生信息技术的可用性时使用多方法方法,因为它可以更全面地了解可用性挑战。
To comparatively evaluate the effectiveness of three different methods involving end-users for detecting usability problems in an EHR: user testing, semi-structured interviews and surveys. Data were collected at two major urban dental schools from faculty, residents and dental students to assess the usability of a dental EHR for developing a treatment plan. These included user testing (N=32), semi-structured interviews (N=36), and surveys (N=35). The three methods together identified a total of 187 usability violations: 54% via user testing, 28% via the semi-structured interview and 18% from the survey method, with modest overlap. These usability problems were classified into 24 problem themes in 3 broad categories. User testing covered the broadest range of themes (83%), followed by the interview (63%) and survey (29%) methods. Multiple evaluation methods provide a comprehensive approach to identifying EHR usability challenges and specific problems. The three methods were found to be complementary, and thus each can provide unique insights for software enhancement. Interview and survey methods were found not to be sufficient by themselves, but when used in conjunction with the user testing method, they provided a comprehensive evaluation of the EHR. We recommend using a multi-method approach when testing the usability of health information technology because it provides a more comprehensive picture of usability challenges.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2008.10.002
发表时间: 2009-05-01
影响因子: 4.9
作者:
Jaspers, Monique W. M.
通讯作者: Jaspers, Monique W. M.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.02.005
发表时间: 2011-05-01
影响因子: 4.9
作者:
Khajouei, R.;Hasman, A.;Jaspers, M. W. M.
通讯作者: Jaspers, M. W. M.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.07.002
发表时间: 2011-12-01
影响因子: 4.5
作者:
Khajouei, R.;Peute, L. W. P.;Jaspers, M. W. M.
通讯作者: Jaspers, M. W. M.
DOI: 10.1197/jamia.m1471
发表时间: 2004-03-01
影响因子: 6.4
作者:
Ash, JS;Berg, M;Coiera, E
通讯作者: Coiera, E
DOI: 10.1197/jamia.m2042
发表时间: 2006-09-01
影响因子: 6.4
作者:
Campbell, Emily M.;Sittig, Dean F.;Dykstra, Richard H.
通讯作者: Dykstra, Richard H.