Usability Evaluation of Laboratory and Radiology Information Systems Integrated into a Hospital Information System
- 926 Downloads
This study was conducted to evaluate the usability of widely used laboratory and radiology information systems. Three usability experts independently evaluated the user interfaces of Laboratory and Radiology Information Systems using heuristic evaluation method. They applied Nielsen’s heuristics to identify and classify usability problems and Nielsen’s severity rating to judge their severity. Overall, 116 unique heuristic violations were identified as usability problems. In terms of severity, 67 % of problems were rated as major and catastrophic. Among 10 heuristics, “consistency and standards” was violated most frequently. Moreover, mean severity of problems concerning “error prevention” and “help and documentation” heuristics was higher than of the others. Despite widespread use of specific healthcare information systems, they suffer from usability problems. Improving the usability of systems by following existing design standards and principles from the early phased of system development life cycle is recommended. Especially, it is recommended that the designers design systems that inhibit the initiation of erroneous actions and provide sufficient guidance to users.
KeywordsDeveloping countries Evaluation study Hospital information system Laboratory information system Radiology information system User-computer interface Usability evaluation
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
The authors would like to thank Amirabbas Azizi for its assistance in the study.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
- 1.Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M., and Donaldson, M. S., To err is human: building a safer health system. Institute of Medicine, Washington, 2000.Google Scholar
- 3.Khajouei, R., and Jaspers, M. W., The impact of CPOE medication systems’ design aspects on usability, workflow and medication orders: a systematic review. Methods Inf. Med. 49(1):3–19, 2010.Google Scholar
- 5.Shu, K., Boyle, D., Spurr, C., Horsky, J., Heiman, H., O’Connor, P., Lepore, J., and Bates, D. W., Comparison of time spent writing orders on paper with computerized physician order entry. Stud. Health. Technol. Inform. 84(Pt 2):1207–1211, 2001.Google Scholar
- 7.Horsky J, Kaufman DR, Patel VL (2003) The cognitive complexity of a provider order entry interface. AMIA Annual Symposium proceedings/AMIA Symposium AMIA Symposium:294–298Google Scholar
- 11.Part 11 : Guidance on usability (ISO 9242–11) (1998). In: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs).Google Scholar
- 18.Peute, L. W., and Jaspers, M. M., Usability evaluation of a laboratory order entry system: cognitive walkthrough and think aloud combined. Stud. Health. Technol. Inform. 116:599–604, 2005.Google Scholar
- 20.Nielsen, J., Usability inspection methods. Wiley, New York, 1994.Google Scholar
- 26.Nielsen J, Landauer TK A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems. In: Proceedings ACM/IFIP INTERCHI’93 Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, April 24–29 1993. pp 206–213.Google Scholar