Designing for Safety and Usability

Abstract

The design of systems affects the likelihood and nature of errors that people might make with them, and the ease of error recovery. If developers are to design systems that are less prone to errors propagating, they need to consider the users and user contexts. There are many techniques and resources available to support developers in this. In this paper we report on an interview study involving professionals from major manufacturers of medical devices, to better understand their development practices and the external forces that shape those practices. This identified barriers to user-centered design and corresponding opportunities for support. Results are divided into four themes. These are: collaborative working practices; understanding the user and their situation; providing adequate justification for the adoption of a user-centered approach; and the provision of clear guidance and support. Our findings highlight the importance of ensuring that techniques are adequately justified, applied at the correct time, aligned with the development lifecycle and easy to adopt.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

U.S. Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation / Food and Drug Administration. (2010). Infusing patients safely: Priority issues from the AAMI/FDA infusion device summit. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/4ru69sg

Bass

John

B. E.

(2003). Linking usability to software architecture patterns through general scenarios. Journal of Systems and Software, 66(3), 187-197.

Blandford

Keith

Butterworth

Fields

Furniss

(2007). Disrupting digital library development with scenario informed design. Interacting with Computers, 19(1), 70-82.

Buckle

Clarkson

P. J.

Coleman

Ward

Anderson

(2006). Patient safety, systems design and ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics, 37(4), 491-500.

Carroll

J. M.

(1995). Scenario-based design: envisioning work and technology in system development. NY: Wiley.

Cooper

(1999). The inmates are running the asylum. Indianapolis: Sams: Prentice Hall.

UK Department of Health, (2001). Building a safer NHS for patients: Implementing an organisation with a memory: Great Britain, Department of Health.

European Union, (1993). Council directive 93/42/EEC concerning medical devices. Retreived from http://tinyurl.com/688f4o7

U.S. Food and Drug Administration, (2010a). Infusion pump workshop: Transcript for May 25th 2010. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/4mrleam

10.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration, (2010b). White paper: Infusion pump improvement initiative. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/2u6q6oy

11.

Furniss

Blandford

Curzon

(2011). Confessions from a grounded theory PhD: Experiences and lessons learnt. Paper presented at the ACM SIGCHI conference, Vancouver.

12.

Gupta

S. P.

(2007). Design and delivery of medical devices for home-use: Drivers and challenges. PhD, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge.

13.

Hertzum

(2006). Problem prioritization in usability evaluation: From severity assessments toward impact on design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 21(2), 125-146.

14.

Jaspers

M. W. M.

(2009). A comparison of usability methods for testing interactive health technologies: Methodological aspects and empirical evidence. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(5), 340-353.

15.

Kamper

R. J.

(2002). Extending the usability of heuristics for design and evaluation: Lead, follow get out of the way. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 14(3-4), 447-462.

16.

Karat

C. M.

(1997). Cost-justifying usability engineering in the software life cycle. In Helander, Landauer

T. K.

Prabhu

(Eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 689-704). New York: Elsevier Press.

17.

Kollmann

Sharp

Blandford

(2009). The importance of identity and vision to user experience designers on agile projects. Paper presented at the Agile Conference, Chicago.

18.

Martin

J. L.

Norris

B. J.

Murphy

Crowe

J. A.

(2008). Medical device development: the challenge for ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics, 39(3), 271-283.

19.

UK National Pateint Safety Agency, (2010). Design for patient safety: A guide to the design of electronic infusion devices. London: National Patient Safety Agency.

20.

Pocock

Fields

Harrison

(2001). THEA: A reference guide: University of York, Department of Computer Science.

21.

Shah

S. G. S.

Robinson

AlShawi

(2009). Developing medical device technologies from users’ perspectives: A theoretical framework for involving users in the development process. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25(4), 514-521.

22.

Sutcliffe

Thew

de Bruijn

Buchan

Jarvis

McNaught

Procter

(2010). User engagement by user-centred design in e-Health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society a-Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368(1926), 4209-4224.

23.

Wiklund

(2006). Defining and designing for worst-case users. Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry, 28(7), 52-59.