Telemedicine allows providers to facilitate online medical consultation to patients when there is a geo-graphical distance between them. Similar to other medical consultations, consent is required to receive medical care. Teleconsent, developed to accommodate this requirement, allows providers to collect patient consent via screen-sharing and videoconferencing. However, its usability needs to be evaluated to improve user acceptance. This study uses a heuristic evaluation to identify the usability issues associated with a tele-consent interface. Based on Nielsen’s 10 heuristics, four experts independently evaluated the consent form on two devices (desktop and smartphone), identified violations and assigned severity. Of the 70 violations identified 33.43% violated consistency and standards and 20% violated user control and freedom. Issues requiring immediate attention included the patient’s inability to scroll and zoom (specific to smartphone) while navigating the consent form and the unintuitive signing process. Remediations were suggested to improve the teleconsent system usability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AghaZ.SchapiraR. M.LaudP. W.McNuttG.RoterD. L. (2009). Patient Satisfaction with Physician–Patient Communication During Telemedicine. Telemedicine and E-Health, 15(9), 830–839.
2.
AgnisarmanS.NarasimhaS.Chalil MadathilK.WelchB.BrindaF.AshokA.McElligottJ. (2017). Toward a More Usable Home-Based Video Telemedicine System: A Heuristic Evaluation of the Clinician User Interfaces of Home-Based Video Telemedicine Systems. JMIR Human Factors, 4(2), e11.
3.
AgnisarmanS.PonathilA.LopesS.Chalil MadathilK. (2018). An investigation of consumer’s choice of a healthcare facility when user-generated anecdotal information is integrated into healthcare public reports. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 66, 206–220.
4.
Chalil MadathilK.GreensteinJ. S. (2011). Synchronous Remote Usability Testing: A New Approach Facilitated by Virtual Worlds. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2225–2234). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
5.
Chalil MadathilK.KoikkaraR.ObeidJ.GreensteinJ. S.SandersonI. C.FryarK.GramopadhyeA. K. (2013). An investigation of the efficacy of electronic consenting interfaces of research permissions management system in a hospital setting. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82(9), 854–863.
6.
DimmickS. L.MustaleskiC.BurgissS. G.WelshT. (2000). A case study of benefits & potential savings in rural home telemedicine. Home Healthcare Nurse, 18(2), 124–135.
7.
HvannbergE. T.LawE. L.-C.LérusdóttirM. K. (2007). Heuristic evaluation: Comparing ways of finding and reporting usability problems. Interacting with Computers, 19(2), 225–240.
8.
KhairatS.OttmarP.SleathB.WelchB.QanungoS.NicholsM.ObeidJ. S. (2018). Facilitating the Informed Consent Process Using Teleconsent: Protocol for a Feasibility and Efficacy Study. JMIR Research Protocols, 7(10), e11239.
9.
KochS. (2006). Home telehealth–current state and future trends. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 75(8), 565–576.
10.
LowryP. B.SpauldingT.WellsT.MoodyG.MoffitK.MadariagaS. (4-7Jan2006). A Theoretical Model and Empirical Results Linking Website Interactivity and Usability Satisfaction. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
11.
MendelJ. (2010). The effect of interface consistency and cognitive load on user performance in an information search task (Master of Science Applied Psychology). (PakR., Ed.). Clemson University.
12.
NarasimhaS.AgnisarmanS.MadathilK. C.GramopadhyeA. K.WelchB.McelligottJ. (2016). An Investigation of the Usability Issues of Home-based Video Telemedicine Systems with Geriatric Patients. Proceedings of the 2016 Human Factors and Ergonomics Society’s International Annual Meeting, Washington DC., 60(1), 1804–1808.
13.
NielsenJ. (1992). Finding Usability Problems Through Heuristic Evaluation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 373–380). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
14.
NielsenJ. (1994). Usability Inspection Methods. In Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 413–414). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
15.
NielsenJ.LandauerT. K. (1993). A Mathematical Model of the Finding of Usability Problems. In Proceedings of the INTERACT ‘93 and CHI ‘93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 206–213). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
16.
NielsenJ.MolichR. (1990). Heuristic Evaluation of User Interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 249–256). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
17.
PeredniaD. A.AllenA. (1995). Telemedicine technology and clinical applications. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 273(6), 483–488.
18.
PonathilA.OzkanF.WelchB.BertrandJ.Chalil MadathilK. (2020). Family health history collected by virtual conversational agents: An empirical study to investigate the efficacy of this approach. Journal of Genetic Counseling.
19.
PonathilA.OzkanN. F.BertrandJ.WelchB.MadathilK. C. (2018). An Investigation of the Usability Issues of a Family Health History Compiling Application. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society … Annual Meeting Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Meeting, 62(1), 1699–1703.
20.
RogersW. A.MykityshynA. L.CampbellR. H.FiskA. D. (2001). Analysis of a “Simple” Medical Device. Ergonomics in Design: The Magazine of Human Factors Applications, 9(1), 6–14.
21.
SatzingerJ. W.OlfmanL. (1998). User Interface Consistency across End-User Applications: The Effects on Mental Models. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14(4), 167–193.
22.
SondereggerA.SauerJ. (2010). The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: effects on user performance and perceived usability. Applied Ergonomics, 41(3), 403–410.
23.
WelchB. M.MarshallE.QanungoS.AzizA.LakenM.LenertL.ObeidJ. (2016). Teleconsent: A Novel Approach to Obtain Informed Consent for Research. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 3, 74–79.
24.
YenP.-Y.BakkenS. (2009). A comparison of usability evaluation methods: heuristic evaluation versus end-user think-aloud protocol-an example from a web-based communication tool for nurse scheduling. AMIA … Annual Symposium Proceedings / AMIA Symposium. AMIA Symposium, 2009, 714–718.
