Design of UI Component Model for Evaluation of Medical UI of Ventilator System in Intensive Care Unit

  • Ganesh BhutkarEmail author
  • G. G. Ray
  • Dinesh Katre
  • Shahaji Deshmukh
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 34)


A ventilator system provides a respiratory support to critically-ill patients. Its touch screen-based onscreen User Interface (UI) helps medical users in treatment of the patient. The usability problems in medical UIs may contribute to medical errors, affecting the patient condition. Thus, the usability evaluation of medical UIs is extremely important for patient safety. The study of usability evaluation models has revealed that there is a need of domain-specific evaluation model for medical UIs, focusing on medical context; especially critical aspects in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The proposed UI Component Model is based on UI components, Norman’s action model and identified usability problems.


Usability evaluation model UI component model Ventilator system Intensive care unit 



We are grateful to Prof. Uday Athavankar and Prof. Azizuddin Khan for their critical comments and suggestions during Annual Progress Seminar (APS) presentations. We appreciate a cooperation extended by physicians and healthcare usability experts. At last, we thank Prof. Dhiraj Jadhav and Mahadev Karad for their assistive support in documentation during the research work.


  1. 1.
    Gould, T., de Beer, J.: Principles of artificial ventilation. Anesth. Intensive Care Med. 8(3), 91–101 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhutkar, G., Katre, D., Rajhans, N., Deshmukh, S.: Scope of ergonomic and usability issues with intensive care unit (ICU): an indian perspective. HFESA J.—Ergon. Aust. 22(1), 26–32 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wiklund, M., Wilcox, S.: Designing usability into medical devices. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhutkar, G., Katre, D., Rajhans, N.: Usability survey of medical devices used in ICU. J. HCI Vistas IV (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wiklund, M., Kendler, J., Strochlic, A.: Usability testing of medical devices, pp. 30–33. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang, J., Johnson, T., Patel, V., Paige, D., Kubose, T.: Using usability heuristics to evaluate patient safety of medical devices. J. Biomed. Inform. 36, 23–30 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhutkar, G., Konkani, A., Katre, D., Ray, G.: A review: healthcare usability evaluation methods. Biomed. Instrum. Technol.: Hum. Factors IT 47(s2), 45–53 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lewis, C., Wharton, C.: Cognitive walkthrough. In: Helander, M., Landauer, T., Prabhu, P. (eds.) Handbook of human-computer interaction, pp. 717–730. Elsevier Science, North-Holland (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wharton, C., Rieman, J., Lewis, C., Polson, P.: The cognitive walkthrough method: a practitioner’s guide. In: Nielsen, J., Mack, R. (eds.) Usability inspection methods, pp. 105–140. Wiley, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bhutkar, G., Katre, D., Jadhav, D., Ray, G.: Cognitive walkthrough of medical user interface of ventilator system in intensive care unit. In: Sixth International Conference on Design Computing and Cognition (DCC). London, UK (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Drews, F., Musters, A., Samore, M.: Error producing conditions in intensive care unit, pp. 1–13 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang, J., Patel, V., Johnson, T., Shortliffe E.: Toward cognitive taxonomy of medical errors. AMIA 934–938 (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chapman, R., Taylor, L., Wood, S.: Cataloging errors from reported informatics patient safety adverse events. In: Proceedings of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care Symposium, Baltimore, Maryland, pp. 87–94 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Norman, D.: The design of everyday things, pp. 45–53. Basic Books (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kornecki, A., Zalewski, J.: Experimental evaluation of software development tools for safety-critical real-time systems. Innovations Syst. Softw. Eng. 1, 176–188 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Latorella, K., Prabhu, P.: Review of human error in aviation maintenance and inspection. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 26, 133–161 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yun, M., Han, S., Hong, S., Kwahk, J., Lee, Y.: Development of a systematic checklist for human factor evaluation of the operator aiding system in a nuclear plant. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 25, 597–609 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norros, L., Savioja, P.: Usability evaluation of complex systems: a literature review. Research report: STUK-YTO-TR-204, pp. 1–44. Helsinki (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abran, A., Khelifi, A., Suryn, W., Seffah, A.: Consolidating ISO usability models. In: 11th International Software Quality Management Conference (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Diniz, E., Porto, R., Adachi, T.: Internet banking in Brazil: evaluation of functionality, reliability and usability. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Eval. 8(1), 41–50 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kainda, R., Flechais, I., Roscoe, A.: Security and usability: analysis and evaluation. In: 5th International Conference on Availability‚ Reliability and Security (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Winter, S., Wagner, S.. Deissenboeck, F.: A comprehensive model of usability. In: Engineering Interactive Systems Conference. LNCS Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability engineering. Academic Press, Boston (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ganesh Bhutkar
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • G. G. Ray
    • 1
  • Dinesh Katre
    • 3
  • Shahaji Deshmukh
    • 4
  1. 1.Industrial Design Centre (IDC)IIT BombayMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer EngineeringVITPuneIndia
  3. 3.Human Centered Design and Computing (HCDC) GroupC-DACPuneIndia
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryBVU Medical CollegePuneIndia

Personalised recommendations