Advertisement

Usability Assessment as a Guide to Improve the System Design of a Corneal Topographer

  • Carlos Aceves-GonzalezEmail author
  • Carlos D. de Leon-Zuloaga
  • Zuli T. Galindo-Estupiñan
  • Citlali Díaz-Gutierrez
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 876)

Abstract

The study aimed to assess the efficiency, efficacy and satisfaction of a redesigned portable corneal topography system to identify design solutions for system improvement. Twelve participants had to complete different tasks interacting with the software and the other elements of the system in a controlled scenario. After, a Retrospective Think Aloud was carried out focusing on the most challenging tasks during the system interaction. Finally, a satisfaction questionnaire was used to assess user perception. The most frequent errors and difficulties were identified along with the participants’ insights into the design elements for improvement of the system. Design solutions were generated to address software deficiencies and to improve the design of all aspects of the system. Usability analysis of software showed high relevance in the correct usage of the entire system, and along with the quick guide provides most of the feedback to understand the proper use of the handheld device.

Keywords

System Usability Medical devices Retrospective Think Aloud 

Notes

Acknowledgements

CONACYT supported this work through the Fondo de Innovación Tecnológica FIT [grant number ECO-2016-C01-274898]. We thank Oscar A. Ramos Montes and Esther Alejandra Malagon Rojas from the FESI, UNAM for helping with the process of participant recruitment and managing the facilities to run this research.

References

  1. 1.
    Brooke, R.E., Isherwood, S., Herbert, N.C., Raynor, D.K., Knapp, P.: Hearing aid instruction booklets: employing usability testing to determine effectiveness. Am. J. Audiol. 21(2), 206–214 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fries, R.C.: Reliable Design of Medical Devices. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wiklund, M.E., Kendler, J., Strochlic, A.Y.: Usability Testing of Medical Devices. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Adams, A.: Usability testing in information design. In: Zwaga, H., Boersema, T., Hoonhout, H. (eds.) Visual Information for Everyday Use: Design and Research Perspectives, pp. 3–20. CRC Press (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aceves-González, C., Galindo-Estupiñan, Z.T., Landa-Avila, I.C., Díaz-Gutiérrez, C., Prado-Jiménez, S.D.: Usability assessment of a portable corneal topography device. In: International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 639–650. Springer, Cham (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Paz, F., Pow-Sang, J.A.: A systematic mapping review of usability evaluation methods for software development process. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Appl. 10(1), 165–178 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leventhal, L., Barnes, J.: Usability Engineering: Process, Products and Examples. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lewis, J.R.: IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 7(1), 57–78 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Leon Zuloaga, C.D.: Evaluación del efecto de tres tipos de interfaz en la usabilidad de una receta en pacientes con diabetes mellitus tipo 2, Tesis de Maestría en Ergonomía. Universidad de Guadalajara, México (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vu, K.P.L., Proctor, R.W.: Handbook of Human Factors in Web Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hutchins, E.L., Hollan, J.D., Norman, D.A.: Direct manipulation interfaces. Hum. Comput. Interact. 1(4), 311–338 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Myers, B.A., Bhatnagar, R., Nichols, J., Peck, C.H., Kong, D., Miller, R., Long, A.C.: Interacting at a distance: measuring the performance of laser pointers and other devices. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 33–40. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jordan, P.W.: An Introduction to Usability. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Saffer, D.: Microinteractions: Designing with Details. O’Reilly Media Inc., Sebastopol (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ganier, F.: Factors affecting the processing of procedural instructions: implications for document design. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 47(1), 15–26 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Aceves-Gonzalez
    • 1
  • Carlos D. de Leon-Zuloaga
    • 1
  • Zuli T. Galindo-Estupiñan
    • 1
  • Citlali Díaz-Gutierrez
    • 2
  1. 1.Centro de Investigaciones en ErgonomíaUniversidad de GuadalajaraGuadalajaraMexico
  2. 2.Bleps VisionMetepecMexico

Personalised recommendations