The objectives of this study were to (a) review electronic medical record (EMR) and related electronic health record (EHR) interface usability issues, (b) review how EMRs have been evaluated with safety analysis techniques along with any hazard recognition, and (c) formulate design guidelines and a concept for enhanced EMR interfaces with a focus on diagnosis and documentation processes.
Background
A major impact of information technology in health care has been the introduction of EMRs. Although numerous studies indicate use of EMRs to increase health care quality, there remain concerns with usability issues and safety.
Method
A literature search was conducted using Compendex, PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases to find EMR research published since 2000. Inclusion criteria included relevant English-language papers with subsets of keywords and any studies (manually) identified with a focus on EMR usability.
Results
Fifty studies met the inclusion criteria. Results revealed EMR and EHR usability problems to include violations of natural dialog, control consistency, effective use of language, effective information presentation, and customization principles as well as a lack of error prevention, minimization of cognitive load, and feedback. Studies focusing on EMR system safety made no objective assessments and applied only inductive reasoning methods for hazard recognition.
Conclusion
On the basis of the identified usability problems and structure of safety analysis techniques, we provide EMR design guidelines and a design concept focused on the diagnosis process and documentation.
Application
The design guidelines and new interface concept can be used for prototyping and testing enhanced EMRs.
AbramsonE. L.PatelV.MalhotraS.PfohE. R.Nena OsorioS.CheriffA.. . . KaushalR. (2012). Physician experiences transitioning between an older versus newer electronic health record for electronic prescribing. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 81, 539–548.
2.
AhmedA.ChandraS.HerasevichV.GajicO.PickeringB. W. (2011). The effect of two different electronic health record user interfaces on intensive care provider task load, errors of cognition, and performance. Critical Care Medicine, 39, 1626–1634.
3.
American Society for Quality Control Statistics Division. (1983). Glossary and tables for statistical quality control (2nd ed.). Milwaukee, WI: ASQC Quality Press.
4.
AmmenwerthE.ShawN. (2004). Bad informatics can kill: Is evaluation the answer?Methods of Information in Medicine, 44(1), 1–3.
5.
BahrN. (1997). System safety engineering and risk assessment: A practical approach. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
6.
BatesD. W.GawandeA. A. (2003). Improving safety with information technology. New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 2526–2534.
7.
BeldenJ. L.GraysonR.BarnesJ. (2009). Defining and testing EMR usability: Principles and proposed methods of EMR usability evaluation and rating. Chicago, IL: Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society.
8.
Ben-DayaM. (2009). Failure mode and effect analysis. In Ben-DayaM.DuffuaaS. O.RaoufA.KnezevicJ.Ait-KadiD. (Eds.), Handbook of maintenance management and engineering (pp. 75–90). London, UK: Springer.
9.
BouamraneM. M.MairF. S. (2013). A study of general practitioners’ perspectives on electronic medical records systems in NHSScotland. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(1), 58.
10.
BowmanS. (2013). Impact of electronic health record systems on information integrity: Quality and safety implications. Perspectives in Health Information Management, 10(Fall), 1c.
11.
Caudill-SlosbergM.WeeksW. B. (2005). Case study: Identifying potential problems at the human/technical interface in complex clinical systems. American Journal of Medical Quality, 20, 353–357.
12.
ChaudhryB.WangJ.WuS.MaglioneM.MojicaW.RothE.. . . ShekelleP. G. (2006). Systematic review: Impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144, 742–752.
13.
ChenW.AkayM. (2011). Developing EMRs in developing countries. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, 15, 62–65.
14.
ChinB.SakudaC. (2012). Transforming and improving healthcare through meaning use of health information technology. Hawaii Journal of Medicine and Public Health, 71(4Suppl. 1), 50–55.
15.
ClarkeM. A.SteegeL. M.MooreJ. L.BeldenJ. L.KoopmanR. J.KimM. S. (2013). Addressing human computer interaction issues of electronic health record in clinical encounters. In MarcusA. (Ed.), Design, user experience, and usability: Health, Learning, Playing, Cultural, and Cross-Cultural User Experience (pp. 381–390). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
16.
CraigD.FarrellG. (2010). Designing a physician-friendly interface for an electronic medical record system. In FredA. L. N.FilipeJ.GamboaH. (Eds.), HEALTHINF (pp. 324–329). doi:10.5220/0002746003240329
17.
DixA.FinlayJ.AbowdG.BealleR. (2004). Human–computer interaction (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
18.
EdmundL. C. S.RamaiahC. K.GullaS. P. (2009). Electronic medical records management systems: An overview. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 29(6), 3–12.
19.
EdwardsP. J.MoloneyK. P.JackoJ. A.SainfortF. (2008). Evaluating usability of a commercial electronic health record: A case study. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 66, 718–728.
20.
GaretsD.DavisM. (2006). Electronic medical records vs. electronic health records: Yes, there is a difference. Policy white paper, HIMSS Analytics, Chicago, IL.
GrahamT. A.KushnirukA. W.BullardM. J.HolroydB. R.MeurerD. P.RoweB. H. (2008). How usability of a web-based clinical decision support system has the potential to contribute to adverse medical events. In AMIA annual symposium proceedings (Vol. 2008, p. 257). Bethesda, MD: American Medical Informatics Association.
23.
HagstedtL. J.RudebeckC. E.PeterssonG. (2011). Usability of computerised physician order entry in primary care: Assessing ePrescribing with a new evaluation model. Informatics in Primary Care, 19, 161–168.
24.
HarringtonC.WoodR.BreuerJ.PinzonO.HowellR.PednekarM.ZhuM.ZhangJ. (2011). Using a unified usability framework to dramatically improve the usability of an EMR module. In AMIA annual symposium proceedings (Vol. 2011, p. 549). Bethesda, MD: American Medical Informatics Association.
25.
HarringtonL.KennerlyD.JohnsonC. (2011). Safety issues related to the electronic medical record (EMR): Synthesis of the literature from the last decade, 2000–2009. Journal of Healthcare Management, 56, 31–41.
26.
HarringtonL.PorchL.AcostaK.WilkensK. (2011). Realizing electronic medical record benefits: An easy-to-do usability study. Journal of Nursing Administration, 41, 331–335.
27.
HollinI.GriffinM.KachnowskiS. (2012). How will we know if it’s working? A multi-faceted approach to measuring usability of a specialty-specific electronic medical record. Health Informatics Journal, 18, 219–232.
28.
HymanD.LaireM.RedmondD.KaplanD. W. (2012). The use of patient pictures and verification screens to reduce computerized provider order entry errors. Pediatrics, 130, e211–e219.
29.
IndranoiC.WyattT.LiX. (2009). Development and usability of iCare: An electronic health record system. In Proceedings of the 2009 Industrial Engineering Research Conference (pp. 797–802). Norcross, GA: IIE.
30.
International Organization for Standardization. (1998). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) — Part 11: Guidance on usability (ISO 9241-11:1998). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
31.
JaspersM. W.PeuteL. W.LauteslagerA.BakkerP. J. (2008). Pre-post evaluation of physicians’ satisfaction with a redesigned electronic medical record system. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 136, 303.
32.
JhaA. K.DesRochesC. M.CampbellE. G.DonelanK.RaoS. R.FerrisT. G.. . . BlumenthalD. (2009). Use of electronic health records in US hospitals. New England Journal of Medicine, 360, 1628–1638.
33.
KalogriopoulosN. A.BaranJ.NimunkarA. J.WebsterJ. G. (2009). Electronic medical record systems for developing countries: Review. In Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2009: Annual International Conference of the IEEE (pp. 1730–1733). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
34.
KumarS.AldrichK. (2010). Overcoming barriers to electronic medical record (EMR) implementation in the US healthcare system: A comparative study. Health Informatics Journal, 16, 306–318.
35.
KuqiK.EveleighT.HolzerT.SarkaniS. (2012). Using design structure matrix for improving electronic medical record usability. In Systems Conference (SysCon), 2012 IEEE International (pp. 1–6). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
36.
LevesonN. (2004). A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Safety Science, 42, 237–270.
37.
LowryS. Z.QuinnM. T.RamaiahM.SchumacherR. M.PattersonE. S.NorthR.. . . AbbottP. (2012). Technical evaluation, testing, and validation of the usability of electronic health records. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
38.
LowryS. Z.RamaiahM.PattersonE. S.BrickD.GursesA. P.OzokA.. . . GibbonsM. C. (2014). Integrating electronic health records into clinical workflow: An application of human factors modeling methods to ambulatory care. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
39.
McGuireM. J.NoronhaG.SamalL.YehH. C.CrocettiS.KravetS. (2013). Patient safety perceptions of primary care providers after implementation of an electronic medical record system. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 28, 184–192.
40.
MéndezE. O.RenS. (2012, May). Design of cyber-physical interface for automated vital signs reading in electronic medical records systems. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology (EIT) (pp. 1–10). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
41.
MillerG. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
42.
MolichR.NielsenJ. (1990). Improving a human–computer dialogue. Communications of the ACM, 33, 338–348.
43.
NakanoV. N. A. V. N.TohyamaV. N. (2009). Human centered design in medical fields. FUJITSU Scientific and Technical Journal, 45, 232–238.
44.
O’DonnellH. C.KaushalR.BarrónY.CallahanM. A.AdelmanR. D.SieglerE. L. (2009). Physicians’ attitudes towards copy and pasting in electronic note writing. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 24, 63–68.
45.
OmdahlT. P. (Ed.). (1988). Reliability, availability, and maintainability dictionary. Milwaukee, WI: ASQC Quality Press.
46.
PereiraR.DuarteJ.SalazarM.SantosM.NevesJ.AbelhaA.MachadoJ. (2012). Usability evaluation of electronic health record. In 2012 IEEE EMBS Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences (IECBES) (pp. 359–364). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
47.
ReussE.NaefR.KellerR.NorrieM. (2007). Physicians’ and nurses’ documenting practices and implications for electronic patient record design. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4799, 113–118.
48.
RodriguezN. J.BorgesJ. A.MurilloV.OrtizJ.SandsD. Z. (2002). A study of physicians’ interaction with text-based and graphical-based electronic patient record systems. In Proceedings of the 15th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems, 2002 (CBMS 2002) (pp. 357–360). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
49.
RogersM. L.SockolowP. S.BowlesK. H.HandK. E.GeorgeJ. (2013). Use of a human factors approach to uncover informatics needs of nurses in documentation of care. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82, 1068–1074.
50.
RoseA.SchnipperJ.ParkE.PoonE.LiQ.MiddletonB. (2005). Using qualitative studies to improve the usability of an EMR. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 38, 51–60.
51.
SaitwalH.FengX.WaljiM.PatelV.ZhangJ. (2010). Assessing performance of an electronic health record (EHR) using cognitive task analysis. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 79, 501–506.
52.
SchumacherR. M.BerkowitzL.AbramsonP.LiebovitzD. (2010). Electronic health records: Physician’s perspective on usability. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting (pp. 816–820). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
53.
ShachakA.Hadas-DayagiM.ZivA.ReisS. (2009). Primary care physicians’ use of an electronic medical record system: A cognitive task analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 24, 341–348.
54.
SinghR.ServossT.KalsmanM.FoxC.SinghG. (2004). Estimating impacts on safety caused by the introduction of electronic medical records in primary care. Informatics in Primary Care, 12, 235–242.
55.
SittigD. F.SinghH. (2012). Electronic health records and national patient-safety goals. New England Journal of Medicine, 367, 1854–1860.
56.
SuebnukranS.RittipakornP.ThongyoiB.BoonpitakK.WongsapaiM.PakdeesanP. (2013). Usability assessment of an electronic health record in a comprehensive dental clinic. SpringPlus, 2(1), 1–8.
57.
TasaU.OzcanO.YantacA.UnluerA. (2008). A case study on better iconographic design in electronic medical records’ user interface. Informatics for Health & Social Care, 33, 125–138.
58.
ThielkeS.HammondK.HelbigS. (2007). Copying and pasting of examinations within the electronic medical record. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 76, S122–S128.
59.
VatnøyT. K.VaboG.FossumM. (2014). A usability evaluation of an electronic health record system for nursing documentation used in the municipality healthcare services in Norway. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on HCI in Business (pp. 690–699). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
60.
VenturaM.BattanA.ZorloniC.AbbiatiL.ColomboM.FarinaS.TagliabueP. (2011). The electronic medical record: Pros and cons. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 24(S1), 163–166.
61.
ViitanenJ.KuusistoA.NykänenP. (2011, February). Usability of electronic nursing record systems: Definition and results from an evaluation study in Finland. In ITCH (pp. 333-338).
62.
WaljiM.KalenderianE.TranD.KookalK.NguyenV.TokedeO.WhiteM.VaderhobliR.RamoniR.StarkP.KimmesN.Schoonheim-KleinM.PatelV. (2013). Detection and characterization of usability problems in structured data entry interfaces in dentistry. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82, 128–138.
63.
Weber-JahnkeJ.Mason-BlakleyF. (2012). On the safety of electronic medical records. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7151, 177–194.
64.
WeirC.HurdleJ.FelgarM.HoffmanJ.RothB.NebekerJ. (2003). Direct text entry in electronic progress notes: An evaluation of input errors. Methods of Information in Medicine, 42, 61–67.
65.
WeisJ. M.LevyP. C. (2014). Copy, paste, and cloned notes in electronic health records: Importing content into electronic health records. Prevalence, benefits, risks, and best practice recommendations. CHEST Journal, 145, 632–638.
66.
WickensC. D.CarswellC. M. (1995). The proximity compatibility principle: Its psychological foundation and relevance to display design. Human Factors, 37, 473–494.
67.
WilcoxA.ChenY.-H.HripcsakG. (2011). Minimizing electronic health record patient-note mismatches. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 18, 511–514.
68.
WinK. T.PhungH.YoungL.TranM.AlcockC.HillmanK. (2004). Electronic health record system risk assessment: A case study from the MINET. Health Information Management, 33(2), 43–48.
69.
WuR.OrrM.ChignellM.StrausS. (2008). Usability of a mobile electronic medical record prototype: A verbal protocol analysis. Informatics for Health & Social Care, 33, 139–149.
70.
YamamotoL. G. (2014). Reducing Emergency department charting and ordering errors with a room number watermark on the electronic medical record display. Hawai’i Journal of Medicine & Public Health, 73, 322.
71.
YenP. Y.BakkenS. (2012). Review of health information technology usability study methodologies. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 19, 413–422.
72.
ZhangJ.WaljiM. F. (2011). TURF: Toward a unified framework of EHR usability. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 44, 1056–1067.
73.
ZhengK.PadmanR.JohnsonM. (2007). User interface optimization for an electronic medical record system. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 129, 1058–1062.
