A Usability Inspection of Medication Management in Three Personal Health Applications

  • Katie A. Siek
  • Danish Ullah Khan
  • Stephen E. Ross
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5619)

Abstract

We present the findings of a cognitive walkthrough inspection on three Personal Health Applications (PHAs). Two of the PHAs, Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault, are general purpose PHAs that are freely available to the general public. The last PHA, Colorado Care Tablet, is a prototype PHA that was designed specifically for older adults to manage their medication information. Older adults need a way to manage medications and share this information with their caregivers and healthcare providers to avoid complications during transitions of care. PHAs provide people with the ability to collect and share health information. However, given the problems older adults have with navigating applications and web pages, we needed to inspect currently available PHAs and identify problems older adults may have when using them for medication management before conducting user studies. Based on our findings, we encourage the design community to place more of an emphasis on interface consistency and tightly coupling information with links.

Keywords

Usability Inspection Methods Cognitive Walkthrough Personal Health Applications Personal Health Records 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Chisnell, et al.: New Heuristics for Understanding Older Adults as Web Users. Technical Communication, 53, Society for Technical Communication, pp. 39–59 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coleman, E.A., et al.: Preparing patients and caregivers to participate in care delivered across settings: the Care Transitions Intervention. J. Am. Ger. Soc. 52, 1817–1825 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Galganski, M.E., et al.: Reduced control of motor output in a human hand muscle of elderly subjects during submaximal contractions. J. Neurophysiol. 69, 2108–2115 (1993)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haverhals, L., et al.: Older Adults with Multi-morbidity: Medication Information Needs and Personal Health Applications (PHA) Design Implications (in Review)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hertzum, M., Jacobsen, N.: The Evaluator Effect: A Chilling Fact About Usability Evaluation Methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 13, 421–443 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacko, J., et al.: Older adults and visual impairment: what do exposure times and accuracy tell us about performance gains associated with multimodal feedback? In: CHI 2003: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA, pp. 33–40. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jeffries, R., et al.: User interface evaluation in the real world: a comparison of four techniques, pp. 119–124. ACM, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Siek, K.A.: Mobile Design for Older Adults. In: Handbook of Research on User Interface Design and Evaluation for Mobile Technology, IGI, pp. 624–634 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaufman, D.: Usability in the real world: assessing medical information technologies in patients’ homes. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 36, 45–60 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lewis, C., et al.: Testing a walkthrough methodology for theory-based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces, pp. 235–242. ACM, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spencer, R.: The streamlined cognitive walkthrough method, working around social constraints encountered in a software development company, The Hague, The Netherlands, pp. 353–359. ACM, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ross, S.E., et al.: Colorado Care Tablet and My Medi-Health: Personal Health Applications for Medication Management (in Review)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wharton, C., et al.: The cognitive walkthrough method: a practitioner’s guide, pp. 105–140. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katie A. Siek
    • 1
  • Danish Ullah Khan
    • 1
  • Stephen E. Ross
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Colorado at BoulderColoradoUSA
  2. 2.Division of General Internal MedicineUniversity of Colorado DenverColoradoUSA

Personalised recommendations