» Articles » PMID: 35536613

Assessing the Usability of a Clinical Decision Support System: Heuristic Evaluation

Overview
Specialty Health Services
Date 2022 May 10
PMID 35536613
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Poor usability is a primary cause of unintended consequences related to the use of electronic health record (EHR) systems, which negatively impacts patient safety. Due to the cost and time needed to carry out iterative evaluations, many EHR components, such as clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), have not undergone rigorous usability testing prior to their deployment in clinical practice. Usability testing in the predeployment phase is crucial to eliminating usability issues and preventing costly fixes that will be needed if these issues are found after the system's implementation.

Objective: This study presents an example application of a systematic evaluation method that uses clinician experts with human-computer interaction (HCI) expertise to evaluate the usability of an electronic clinical decision support (CDS) intervention prior to its deployment in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods: We invited 6 HCI experts to participate in a heuristic evaluation of our CDS intervention. Each expert was asked to independently explore the intervention at least twice. After completing the assigned tasks using patient scenarios, each expert completed a heuristic evaluation checklist developed by Bright et al based on Nielsen's 10 heuristics. The experts also rated the overall severity of each identified heuristic violation on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0 indicates no problems and 4 indicates a usability catastrophe. Data from the experts' coded comments were synthesized, and the severity of each identified usability heuristic was analyzed.

Results: The 6 HCI experts included professionals from the fields of nursing (n=4), pharmaceutical science (n=1), and systems engineering (n=1). The mean overall severity scores of the identified heuristic violations ranged from 0.66 (flexibility and efficiency of use) to 2.00 (user control and freedom and error prevention), in which scores closer to 0 indicate a more usable system. The heuristic principle user control and freedom was identified as the most in need of refinement and, particularly by nonnursing HCI experts, considered as having major usability problems. In response to the heuristic match between system and the real world, the experts pointed to the reversed direction of our system's pain scale scores (1=severe pain) compared to those commonly used in clinical practice (typically 1=mild pain); although this was identified as a minor usability problem, its refinement was repeatedly emphasized by nursing HCI experts.

Conclusions: Our heuristic evaluation process is simple and systematic and can be used at multiple stages of system development to reduce the time and cost needed to establish the usability of a system before its widespread implementation. Furthermore, heuristic evaluations can help organizations develop transparent reporting protocols for usability, as required by Title IV of the 21st Century Cures Act. Testing of EHRs and CDSSs by clinicians with HCI expertise in heuristic evaluation processes has the potential to reduce the frequency of testing while increasing its quality, which may reduce clinicians' cognitive workload and errors and enhance the adoption of EHRs and CDSSs.

Citing Articles

iSurgARy: A mobile augmented reality solution for ventriculostomy in resource-limited settings.

Asadi Z, Castillo J, Asadi M, Sinclair D, Kersten-Oertel M Healthc Technol Lett. 2025; 12(1):e12118.

PMID: 39816703 PMC: 11733309. DOI: 10.1049/htl2.12118.


Electronic health record system use and documentation burden of acute and critical care nurse clinicians: a mixed-methods study.

Cho H, Nguyen O, Weaver M, Pruitt J, Marcelle C, Salloum R J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024; 31(11):2540-2549.

PMID: 39259920 PMC: 11491602. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocae239.


Design and evaluation of a serious video game to treat preschool children with speech sound disorders.

Saeedi S, Ghazisaeedi M, Ramezanghorbani N, Seifpanahi M, Bouraghi H Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):17299.

PMID: 39068211 PMC: 11283480. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-68119-x.


Revolutionizing Cardiology through Artificial Intelligence-Big Data from Proactive Prevention to Precise Diagnostics and Cutting-Edge Treatment-A Comprehensive Review of the Past 5 Years.

Stamate E, Piraianu A, Ciobotaru O, Crassas R, Duca O, Fulga A Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(11).

PMID: 38893630 PMC: 11172021. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14111103.


Formative evaluation of an emergency department clinical decision support system for agitation symptoms: a study protocol.

Wong A, Nath B, Shah D, Kumar A, Brinker M, Faustino I BMJ Open. 2024; 14(2):e082834.

PMID: 38373857 PMC: 10882402. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082834.


References
1.
Muhiyaddin R, Abd-Alrazaq A, Househ M, Alam T, Shah Z . The Impact of Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) on Physicians: A Scoping Review. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2020; 272:470-473. DOI: 10.3233/SHTI200597. View

2.
Reeder B, Drake C, Ozkaynak M, Wald H . Usability Testing of a Mobile Clinical Decision Support App for Urinary Tract Infection Diagnosis in Nursing Homes. J Gerontol Nurs. 2019; 45(7):11-17. DOI: 10.3928/00989134-20190408-01. View

3.
Hettinger A, Melnick E, Ratwani R . Advancing electronic health record vendor usability maturity: Progress and next steps. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021; 28(5):1029-1031. PMC: 8068416. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa329. View

4.
Jia P, Zhang L, Chen J, Zhao P, Zhang M . The Effects of Clinical Decision Support Systems on Medication Safety: An Overview. PLoS One. 2016; 11(12):e0167683. PMC: 5157990. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167683. View

5.
Lopez K, Febretti A, Stifter J, Johnson A, Wilkie D, Keenan G . Toward a More Robust and Efficient Usability Testing Method of Clinical Decision Support for Nurses Derived From Nursing Electronic Health Record Data. Int J Nurs Knowl. 2016; 28(4):211-218. PMC: 5183526. DOI: 10.1111/2047-3095.12146. View