Understanding Patient User Experience in Obstetric Work Systems

  • Enid N. H. Montague
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5624)

Abstract

Patient user experiences with medical technology may be important predictors of patient ratings of satisfaction with health care systems and of acceptance of technologies used in their care. The purpose of this study was to understand how patients experience medical technology during medical events as passive users. 25 women were interviewed after the birth of their child about the technologies that were used to provide them care. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and reduced to codes in the qualitative data analysis tradition. Results show that patients have user experiences with technologies as passive users.

Keywords

Patients Technology User Experience Health Care 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Davis, M.: Theoretical foundations for experiential systems design. In: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMM workshop on Experiential telepresence. ACM Press, Berkeley (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blythe, M., Wright, P., McCarthy, J., Bertelsen, O.W.: Theory and method for experience centered design. In: CHI 2006 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, Montrcal (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, N.: User experience—a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology 25, 91–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cassell, J., Bickmore, T.: External manifestations of trustworthiness in the interface. Communications of the ACM 43, 50–57 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corritore, C.L., Kracher, B., Wiedenbeck, S.: On-line trust: Concepts, evolving themes, a model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58, 737–758 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H., Howe, D.C.: Trust online. Communications of the ACM 43 (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aboulafia, A., Bannon, L., Fernstrom, M.: Shifting Perspective from Effect to Affect: Some Framing Questions. In: Proceedings of The International Conference on Affective Human Factors Design, pp. 508–514 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Agarwal, R., Karahanna, E.: Time Flies When You’re Having Fun: Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs About Information Technology Usage. MIS Quarterly 24, 665–694 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonner, J.V.H.: Envisioning Future Needs: From Pragmatics to Pleasure. In: Green, W.S., Jordan, P.W. (eds.) Pleasure with Products. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carroll, J.M., Thomas, J.M.: Fun. Sigchi Bull. 19, 21–24 (1988)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Draper, S.W.: Analysing fun as a candidate software requirement. Personal Technology 3, 117–122 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Monk, A., Hassenzahl, M., Blythe, M., Reed, D.: Funology: Designing enjoyment. In: Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems, CHI 2002, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA (2002); Workshop description Funology: Designing enjoyment Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bruseberg, A., McDonagh-Philp, D.: New product development by eliciting user experience and aspirations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 55, 435–452 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Margolin, V.: Getting to know the user. Design Studies 18, 227–236 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Overbeeke, K., Djadjadiningrat, T., Hummels, C., Wensveen, S.: Beauty in Usability: Forget about Ease of Use? In: Green, W.S., Jordan, P.W. (eds.) Pleasure with Products, pp. 9–18. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Noyes, J., Littledale, R.: Beyond Usability, Computer Playfulness. In: Green, W.S., Jordan, P.W. (eds.) Pleasure with Products, pp. 49–59. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Angeli, A., Lynch, P., Johnson, G.I.: Pleasure versus Efficiency in User Interfaces: Towards an Involvement Framework. In: Green, W.S., Jordan, P.W. (eds.) Pleasure with Products, pp. 97–111. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dolan, G., Iredale, R., Williams, R., Ameen, J.: Consumer use of the internet for health information: a survey of primary care patients. International Journal of Consumer Studies 28, 147–153 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ball, M.J., Lillis, J.: E-health: transforming the physician/patient relationship. International Journal of Medical Informatics 61, 1–10 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Opinion Leader Research for the Department of Health: Results from a programme of consultation to develop a patient experience statement High Holborn, London WC1V 7QG (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Logan, R.J., Augaitis, S.: Design of Simplified Television Remote Controls. A Case for Behavioral and Emotional Usability (1994)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bates, J.: The Role of Emotion in Believable Agents. Communications of ACM 37, 122–125 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Creusen, M., Snelders, D.: Product Appearance and Consumer Pleasure. In: Green, W.S., Jordan, P.W. (eds.) Pleasure with Products, pp. 69–75. Taylor & Francis, Abington (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jordan, P.W.: Designing Pleasurable Products. Taylor & Francis, London (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schenkman, B.N., Jönsson, F.U.: Aesthetics and preferences of web pages. Behaviour & Information Technology 19, 367–377 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim, J., Moon, J.Y.: Designing towards emotional usability in customer interfaces- trustworthiness of cyber-banking systems interfaces. Interacting with Computers 10, 1–29 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Desmet, P., Overbeeke, C., Tax, S.: Designing products with added emotional value: Development and application of an approach for research through design. The Design Journal 4, 32–47 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Forlizzi, J., Battarbee, K.: Understanding Experience in Interactive Systems. In: DIS 2004, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Forlizzi, J., Ford, S.: The building blocks of experience: An early framework for interaction designers Systems 2000, New York, NY (2000)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Polkinghorne, D.: Two conflicting calls for methodological reform. The Counseling Psychologist 19, 103–114 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Creswell, J.W.: Qualitative inquiry and research design. SAGE, Thousand Oaks (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine, Chicago (1967)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Erickson, F.: Qualitative methods in research on teaching, p. 147 (1985)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Enid N. H. Montague
    • 1
  1. 1.Industrial and Systems Engineering DepartmentUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison3270 Mechanical EngineeringMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations