Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interaction Design for Healthcare Technologies

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Human Computer Interaction

  • 122 Accesses

Abstract

Interactive healthcare technologies are proliferating in terms of the health conditions they address and the technological innovations embedded in them. Some are transforming healthcare but others are rejected as not being fit for purpose. Key factors in this are the quality of user interactions and the fit within the broader context of use. This chapter reviews approaches to developing interactive healthcare technologies from different disciplinary origins. It outlines key theories and models that can inform the design of clinician-facing, individual-facing and shared care technologies, and reviews issues around responsible research and innovation. These various perspectives are synthesised in an integrated design lifecycle that draws on multiple disciplines. While some of this draws on traditional human–computer interaction (HCI) perspectives, to traverse the ‘valley of death’ between early prototypes and deployment at scale it is essential to take a broad view of HCI and Human Factors that embraces the diffusion of innovation and integration into care pathways.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Asan O, Choudhury A (2021) Research trends in artificial intelligence applications in human factors health care: mapping review. JMIR Hum Factors 8(2):e28236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellio M, Furniss D, Oxtoby NP, Garbarino S, Firth NC, Ribbens A, Alexander DC, Blandford A (2021) Opportunities and barriers for adoption of a decision-support tool for Alzheimer’s disease. ACM Trans Comput Healthcare 2(4):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndt E, Furniss D, Blandford A (2015) Learning contextual inquiry and distributed cognition: a case study on technology use in anaesthesia. Cogn Tech Work 17(3):431–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blandford A (2019) HCI for health and wellbeing: challenges and opportunities. Int J Hum Comput Stud 131:41–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blandford A, Furniss D, Vincent C (2014) Patient safety and interactive medical devices: realigning work as imagined and work as done. Clinical risk 20(5):107–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blandford A, Gibbs J, Newhouse N, Perski O, Singh A, Murray E (2018) Seven lessons for interdisciplinary research on interactive digital health interventions. Dig Health 4:2055207618770325

    Google Scholar 

  • Blandford A, Wesson J, Amalberti R, AlHazme R, Allwihan R (2020) Opportunities and challenges for telehealth within, and beyond, a pandemic. Lancet Glob Health 8(11):e1364–e1365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite J, Churruca K, Long JC, Ellis LA, Herkes J (2018) When complexity science meets implementation science: a theoretical and empirical analysis of systems change. BMC Med 16(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess ER, Reddy MC, Davenport A, Laboi P, Blandford A (2019, May) “Tricky to get your head around” Information work of people managing chronic kidney disease in the UK. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Byambasuren O, Beller E, Hoffmann T, Glasziou P (2020) Barriers to and facilitators of the prescription of mHealth apps in Australian general practice: qualitative study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 8(7):e17447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassano-Piché A, Trbovich P, Griffin M, Lin YL, Easty T (2015) Human factors for health technology safety: evaluating and improving the use of health technology in the real world. Available from https://bmet.ewh.org/handle/20.500.12091/65. Accessed 17 June 2022

  • Costello KL, Veinot TC (2020) A spectrum of approaches to health information interaction: from avoidance to verification. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 71(8):871–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dearden A (2012, March) See no evil? Ethics in an interventionist ICTD. In: Proceedings of the fifth international conference on information and communication technologies and development, pp 46–55

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Drolet BC, Lorenzi NM (2011) Translational research: understanding the continuum from bench to bedside. Transl Res 157(1):1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan X, Chao D, Zhang Z, Wang D, Li X, Tian F (2021) Utilization of self-diagnosis health chatbots in real-world settings: case study. J Med Internet Res 23(1):e19928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filkins BL, Kim JY, Roberts B, Armstrong W, Miller MA, Hultner ML, Castillo AP, Ducom JC, Topol EJ, Steinhubl SR (2016) Privacy and security in the era of digital health: what should translational researchers know and do about it? Am J Transl Res 8(3):1560

    Google Scholar 

  • Folmer E (n.d.) Interaction design patterns. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/book/the-glossary-of-human-computer-interaction/interaction-design-patterns. Accessed 22 June 2022

  • Furniss D, Masci P, Curzon P, Mayer A, Blandford A (2015) Exploring medical device design and use through layers of distributed cognition: how a glucometer is coupled with its context. J Biomed Inform 53:330–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genuis SK, Bronstein J (2017) Looking for “normal”: sense making in the context of health disruption. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 68(3):750–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon WJ, Landman A, Zhang H, Bates DW (2020) Beyond validation: getting health apps into clinical practice. NPJ Dig Med 3(1):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Papoutsi C, Lynch J, Hughes G, Hinder S, Fahy N, Procter R, Shaw S (2017) Beyond adoption: a new framework for theorizing and evaluating nonadoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health and care technologies. J Med Internet Res 19(11):e8775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heeks R (2006) Health information systems: failure, success and improvisation. Int J Med Inform 75(2):125–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holden RJ, Carayon P, Gurses AP, Hoonakker P, Hundt AS, Ozok AA, Rivera-Rodriguez AJ (2013) SEIPS 2.0: a human factors framework for studying and improving the work of healthcare professionals and patients. Ergonomics 56(11):1669–1686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollan J, Hutchins E, Kirsh D (2000) Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Trans Comp Hum Interact (TOCHI) 7(2):174–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtzblatt K, Beyer H (1997) Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization (2015) IEC 62366 Part 1: application of usability engineering to medical devices. ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization (2018) ISO 9241-11:2018(en) Ergonomics of human-system interaction – Part 11: usability: definitions and concepts. ISO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaissis G, Ziller A, Passerat-Palmbach J, Ryffel T, Usynin D, Trask A, Lima I, Mancuso J, Jungmann F, Steinborn MM, Saleh A (2021) End-to-end privacy preserving deep learning on multi-institutional medical imaging. Nat Mach Intel 3(6):473–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karni L, Dalal K, Memedi M, Kalra D, Klein GO (2020) Information and communications technology–based interventions targeting patient empowerment: framework development. J Med Internet Res 22(8):e17459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khairat S, Coleman C, Newlin T, Rand V, Ottmar P, Bice T, Carson SS (2019) A mixed-methods evaluation framework for electronic health records usability studies. J Biomed Inform 94:103175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laboi P (2014) Making dialysis care more person centred. https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2014/11/21/paul-laboi-making-dialysis-care-more-person-centred/. Accessed 17 June 2022

  • Lagan S, Sandler L, Torous J (2021) Evaluating evaluation frameworks: a scoping review of frameworks for assessing health apps. BMJ Open 11(3):e047001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons I, Blandford A (2018) Safer healthcare at home: detecting, correcting and learning from incidents involving infusion devices. Appl Ergon 67:104–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCracken J, Hoel D, Jovanovic L (1997) From ants to analogues: puzzles and promises in diabetes management. Postgrad Med 101(4):138–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin G, Ghafur S, Cingolani I, Symons J, King D, Arora S, Darzi A (2019) The effects and preventability of 2627 patient safety incidents related to health information technology failures: a retrospective analysis of 10 years of incident reporting in England and Wales. The Lancet Digital Health 1(3):e127–e135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohr DC, Schueller SM, Montague E, Burns MN, Rashidi P (2014) The behavioral intervention technology model: an integrated conceptual and technological framework for eHealth and mHealth interventions. J Med Internet Res 16(6):e3077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadarzynski T, Miles O, Cowie A, Ridge D (2019) Acceptability of artificial intelligence (AI)-led chatbot services in healthcare: a mixed-methods study. Dig Health 5:2055207619871808

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemeth CP, Cook RI, O’Connor M, Klock PA (2004) Using cognitive artifacts to understand distributed cognition. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cyber Part A Syst Hum 34(6):726–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noah B, Keller MS, Mosadeghi S, Stein L, Johl S, Delshad S, Tashjian VC, Lew D, Kwan JT, Jusufagic A, Spiegel BM (2018) Impact of remote patient monitoring on clinical outcomes: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. NPJ Dig Med 1(1):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor S, Hanlon P, O’Donnell CA, Garcia S, Glanville J, Mair FS (2016) Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: a systematic review of qualitative studies. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 16(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perera C, Barhamgi M, Bandara AK, Ajmal M, Price B, Nuseibeh B (2020) Designing privacy-aware internet of things applications. Inf Sci 512:238–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajkomar A, Mayer A, Blandford A (2015) Understanding safety–critical interactions with a home medical device through Distributed Cognition. J Biomed Inform 56:179–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratwani RM, Fairbanks RJ, Hettinger AZ, Benda NC (2015) Electronic health record usability: analysis of the user-centered design processes of eleven electronic health record vendors. J Am Med Inform Assoc 22(6):1179–1182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruthven I (2019, March) Making meaning: a focus for information interactions research. In: Proceedings of the 2019 conference on human information interaction and retrieval, pp 163–171

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saha M, Varghese D, Bartindale T, Thilsted SH, Ahmed SI, Olivier P (2022) Towards sustainable ICTD in Bangladesh: understanding the program and policy landscape and its implications for CSCW and HCI. Proc ACM Hum-Comput Interact 6(CSCW1):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider H, Hill S, Blandford A (2016) Patients know best: qualitative study on how families use patient-controlled personal health records. J Med Internet Res 18(2):e4652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler D, Namioka A (eds) (1993) Participatory design: principles and practices. CRC Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp H, Preece J, Rogers Y (2019) Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction, 5th edn. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby JM, Boyd KA, Craig N, French DP, McIntosh E, Petticrew M (2021) A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance. bmj 374

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith SW, Koppel R (2014) Healthcare information technology’s relativity problems: a typology of how patients’ physical reality, clinicians’ mental models, and healthcare information technology differ. J Am Med Inform Assoc 21(1):117–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith W, Wadley G, Webber S, Ploderer B, Lederman R (2014, December) Unbounding the interaction design problem: the contribution of HCI in three interventions for well-being. In: Proceedings of the 26th Australian computer-human interaction conference on designing futures: the future of design, pp 392–395

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl BC, Coeckelbergh M (2016) Ethics of healthcare robotics: towards responsible research and innovation. Robot Auton Syst 86:152–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoyanov SR, Hides L, Kavanagh DJ, Zelenko O, Tjondronegoro D, Mani M (2015) Mobile app rating scale: a new tool for assessing the quality of health mobile apps. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 3(1):e3422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun K, Goodfellow H, Konstantara E, Hill A, Lennard D, Lloyd-Dehler E, Mughal M, Pritchard-Jones K, Robson C, Murray E (2021) The multidisciplinary, theory-based co-design of a new digital health intervention supporting the care of oesophageal cancer patients. Dig Health 7:20552076211038410

    Google Scholar 

  • Topol E (2015) The patient will see you now: the future of medicine is in your hands. Basic Books

    Google Scholar 

  • van Berkel N, Clarkson MJ, Xiao G, Dursun E, Allam M, Davidson BR, Blandford A (2020) Dimensions of ecological validity for usability evaluations in clinical settings. J Biomed Inform 110:103553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Berkel N, Bellio M, Skov MB, Blandford A (2023) Measurements, Algorithms, and Presentations of Reality: Framing Interactions with AI-Enabled Decision Support. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 30(2):1–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Yardley L, Morrison L, Bradbury K, Muller I (2015) The person-based approach to intervention development: application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. J Med Internet Res 17(1):e4055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeager CM, Benight CC (2018) If we build it, will they come? Issues of engagement with digital health interventions for trauma recovery. Mhealth 4

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin K, Jung J, Coiera E, Laranjo L, Blandford A, Khoja A, Tai WT, Phillips DP, Lau AY (2020) Patient work and their contexts: scoping review. J Med Internet Res 22(6):e16656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhuang M, Concannon D, Manley E (2022) A framework for evaluating dashboards in healthcare. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 28(4):1715–1731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman C, Albanese-O’Neill A, Haller MJ (2019) Advances in type 1 diabetes technology over the last decade. Eur Endocrinol 15(2):70

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UCL Interaction Centre (UCLIC), University College London, London, UK

    Ann Blandford

Authors
  1. Ann Blandford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ann Blandford .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universite catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

    Jean Vanderdonckt

  2. IRIT - Interactive Critical Sys Group, Paul Sabatier University, Toulouse, France

    Philippe Palanque

  3. I3S, INRIA wimmics/SPARKS team, Université Nice Sophia Antipolis, Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

    Marco Winckler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Blandford, A. (2023). Interaction Design for Healthcare Technologies. In: Vanderdonckt, J., Palanque, P., Winckler, M. (eds) Handbook of Human Computer Interaction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27648-9_68-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27648-9_68-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27648-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27648-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Computer SciencesReference Module Computer Science and Engineering

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation