Study of Suitability of Computer Workstations Design for Nurses’ Work Content

  • Farman A. MoayedEmail author
  • April Savoy
  • Celeste Turpen
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 482)


The majority of published research about EMR systems regarding nurses and their clinical tasks have centered on their attitudes toward EMR systems, which have generally been positive and accepting. There is a lack of studies that would consider dimensions of clinical tasks, human factors, and available equipment to determine how nurses work with EMRs. The goal of this study was to investigate how suitable the design of computer workstations is in terms of hardware selection for nurses’ work content. This was a mixed-method study (focus groups and online survey) to collect data. The survey tool was distributed among 600 nurses in a rural hospital and a series of two-way, three-way chi-square and logistic regression analysis were conducted to investigate the correlation between the human factors aspects of the clinical tasks (work content) and nurses’ preference of computing device and location. The findings from 61 responses illustrated a significant correlation between cognitive and interaction design aspects and the preferred type of computer workstations. This means that better understanding of cognitive and interaction design aspects of clinical tasks by nurses as well as managers and computer software developers is critical in workstation design, resource allocation, better quality of care and patient safety.


Human factors Nurses, computer workstations Electronic medical records Work content Clinical tasks 


  1. 1.
    Chan, M.F.: Investigating nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and skills patterns towards clinical management system: results of a cluster analysis. Med. Inf. Internet Med. 31(3), 161–174 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huryk, L.A.: Factors influencing nurses’ attitudes towards healthcare information technology. J. Nurs. Manag. 18, 606–612 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chow, S.K.Y., Chin, W.Y., Lee, H.Y., Leung, H.C., Tang, F.H.: Nurses’ perceptions and attitudes towards computerisation in a private hospital. J. Clin. Nurs. 21, 1685–1696 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Top, M., Gider, Ö.: Nurses’ views on electronic medical records (EMR) in Turkey: an analysis according to use, quality and user satisfaction. J Med Syst. 36, 1979–1988 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andersen, P., Lindgaard, A.M., Prgomet, M., Creswick, N., Westbrook, J.I.: Mobile and fixed computer use by doctors and nurses on hospital wards: multi-method study on the relationships between clinician role, clinical task, and device choice. J. Med. Internet Res. 11(3), e32 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buchauer, A., Pohl, U., Kurzel, N., Haux, R.: Mobilizing a health professional’s workstation—results of an evaluation study. Int. J. Med. Inf. 54, 105–114 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bragadóttir, H., Gunnarsdóttir, S., Ingason, H.T.: The development and piloting of electronic standardized measures on nursing work: combining engineering and nursing knowledge. J. Nurs. Manag. 21, 679–689 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carayon, P., Wetterneck, T.B., Rivera-Rodriguez, A.J., Hundt, A.S., Hoonakker, P., Holden, R., Gurses, A.P.: Human factors systems approach to healthcare quality and patient safety. Appl. Ergon. 45, 14–25 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holden, R.J., Carayon, P., Gurses, A.P., Hoonakker, P., Hundt, A.S., Ozok, A.A., Rivera-Rodriguez, A.J.: SEIPS 2.0: a human factors framework for studying and improving the work of healthcare professionals and patients. Ergonomics 56(11), 1669–1686 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGinn, C.A., Grenier, S., Duplantie, J., Shaw, N., Sicotte, C., Mathieu, L., Leduc, Y., Légaré, F., Gagnon, M.P.: Comparison of user groups’ perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: a systematic review. BMC Med. 9, 46 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hackman, J.R., Oldham, G.R.: Work redesign. Addision-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA (1980)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McCormick, E.J.: Job analysis: methods and applications. AMACOM, A Division of American Management Association, New York, NY (1979)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ammenwerth, E., Mansmann, U., Iller, C., Eichstädter, R.: Factors affecting and affected by user acceptance of computer-based nursing documentation: results of a two-year study. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 10(1), 69–84 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Top, M., Yilmaz, A., Gider, Ö.: Electronic medical records (EMR) and nurses in Turkish hospitals. Syst. Pract. Act Res. 26(3), 281–297 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Likourezos, A., Chalfin, D.B., Murphy, D.G., Sommer, B., Darcy, K., Davidson, S.J.: Physician and nurses satisfaction with electronic medical record system. J. Emerg. Med. 27(4), 419–424 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oroviogoicoechea, C., Watson, R., Beortegui, E., Remirez, S.: Nurses’ perception of the use of computerised information systems in practice: questionnaire development. J. Clin. Nurs. 19, 240–248 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lærum, H., Faxvaag, A.: Task-oriented evaluation of electronic medical records systems: development and validation of a questionnaire for physicians. BMC Med. Inf. Decis. Mak. 4(1) (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chaudhry, B., Wang, J., Wu, S., Maglione, M., Mojica, W., Roth, E., Morton, S.C., Shekelle, P.G.: Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann. Intern. Med. 144(10), 742–752 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Koivunen, M., Kontio, R., Pitkänen, A., Katajisto, J., Välimäki, M.: Occupational stress and implementation of information technology among nurses working on acute psychiatric wards. Perspect. Psychiatry C 49, 41–49 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carayon, P., Alvarado, C.J., Hundt, A.S.: Work design and patient safety. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 8(5), 395–428 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farman A. Moayed
    • 1
    Email author
  • April Savoy
    • 2
  • Celeste Turpen
    • 3
  1. 1.Indiana State UniversityTerre HauteUSA
  2. 2.Indiana UniversityRichmondUSA
  3. 3.Union HospitalTerre HauteUSA

Personalised recommendations