Human factors approach to evaluate the user interface of physiologic monitoring

Richard Fidler, Raymond Bond, Dewar Finlay, Daniel Guldenring, Anthony Gallagher, Michele Pelter, Barbara Drew, Xiao Hu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: As technology infiltrates more of our personal and professional lives, user expectations for intuitive design have driven many consumer products, while medical equipment continues to have high training requirements. Not much is known about the usability and user experience associated with hospital monitoring equipment. This pilot project aimed to better understand and describe the user interface interaction and user experience with physiologic monitoring technology.Design: This was a prospective, descriptive, mixed-methods quality improvement project to analyze perceptions and task analyses of physiologic monitors.Methods: Following a survey of practice patterns and perceived abilities to accomplish key tasks, 10 voluntary experienced physician and nurse subjects were asked to perform a series of tasks in 7 domains of monitor operations on GE Monitoring equipment in a single institution. For each task analysis, data were collected on time to complete the task, the number of button pushes or clicks required to accomplish the task, economy of motion, and observed errors.Results: Although 60% of the participants reported incorporating monitoring data into patient care, 80% of participants preferred to receive monitoring data at the point of care (bedside). Average perceived central station usability is 5.3 out of 10 (ten is easiest).ConclusionsHigh variability exists in monitoring station interaction performance among those participating in this project. Alarms were almost universally silenced without cognitive recognition of the alarm state. Education related to monitoring operations appeared largely absent in this sample. Most users perceived the interface to not be intuitive, complaining of multiple layers and steps for data retrieval. These clinicians report real-time monitoring helpful for abrupt changes in condition like arrhythmias; however, reviewing alarms is not prioritized as valuable due to frequent false alarms. Participants requested exporting monitoring data to electronic medical records. Much research is needed to develop best practices for display of real-time information, organization and filtering of meaningful data, and simplified ways to find information.
LanguageEnglish
Pages982-987
JournalJournal of Electrocardiology
Volume48
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2015

Fingerprint

Physiologic Monitoring
Point-of-Care Systems
Hospital Equipment and Supplies
Technology
Equipment and Supplies
Electronic Health Records
Information Storage and Retrieval
Quality Improvement
Practice Guidelines
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Patient Care
Nurses
Physicians
Education
Research

Keywords

  • HCI
  • health informatics
  • UX
  • medical devices

Cite this

Fidler, Richard ; Bond, Raymond ; Finlay, Dewar ; Guldenring, Daniel ; Gallagher, Anthony ; Pelter, Michele ; Drew, Barbara ; Hu, Xiao. / Human factors approach to evaluate the user interface of physiologic monitoring. In: Journal of Electrocardiology. 2015 ; Vol. 48, No. 6. pp. 982-987.
@article{4cdd72d6deef4a6ba34d3048d9cfba73,
title = "Human factors approach to evaluate the user interface of physiologic monitoring",
abstract = "Background: As technology infiltrates more of our personal and professional lives, user expectations for intuitive design have driven many consumer products, while medical equipment continues to have high training requirements. Not much is known about the usability and user experience associated with hospital monitoring equipment. This pilot project aimed to better understand and describe the user interface interaction and user experience with physiologic monitoring technology.Design: This was a prospective, descriptive, mixed-methods quality improvement project to analyze perceptions and task analyses of physiologic monitors.Methods: Following a survey of practice patterns and perceived abilities to accomplish key tasks, 10 voluntary experienced physician and nurse subjects were asked to perform a series of tasks in 7 domains of monitor operations on GE Monitoring equipment in a single institution. For each task analysis, data were collected on time to complete the task, the number of button pushes or clicks required to accomplish the task, economy of motion, and observed errors.Results: Although 60{\%} of the participants reported incorporating monitoring data into patient care, 80{\%} of participants preferred to receive monitoring data at the point of care (bedside). Average perceived central station usability is 5.3 out of 10 (ten is easiest).ConclusionsHigh variability exists in monitoring station interaction performance among those participating in this project. Alarms were almost universally silenced without cognitive recognition of the alarm state. Education related to monitoring operations appeared largely absent in this sample. Most users perceived the interface to not be intuitive, complaining of multiple layers and steps for data retrieval. These clinicians report real-time monitoring helpful for abrupt changes in condition like arrhythmias; however, reviewing alarms is not prioritized as valuable due to frequent false alarms. Participants requested exporting monitoring data to electronic medical records. Much research is needed to develop best practices for display of real-time information, organization and filtering of meaningful data, and simplified ways to find information.",
keywords = "HCI, health informatics, UX, medical devices",
author = "Richard Fidler and Raymond Bond and Dewar Finlay and Daniel Guldenring and Anthony Gallagher and Michele Pelter and Barbara Drew and Xiao Hu",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2015.08.032",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "982--987",
journal = "Journal of Electrocardiology",
issn = "0022-0736",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "6",

}

Human factors approach to evaluate the user interface of physiologic monitoring. / Fidler, Richard; Bond, Raymond; Finlay, Dewar; Guldenring, Daniel; Gallagher, Anthony; Pelter, Michele; Drew, Barbara; Hu, Xiao.

In: Journal of Electrocardiology, Vol. 48, No. 6, 01.11.2015, p. 982-987.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Human factors approach to evaluate the user interface of physiologic monitoring

AU - Fidler, Richard

AU - Bond, Raymond

AU - Finlay, Dewar

AU - Guldenring, Daniel

AU - Gallagher, Anthony

AU - Pelter, Michele

AU - Drew, Barbara

AU - Hu, Xiao

PY - 2015/11/1

Y1 - 2015/11/1

N2 - Background: As technology infiltrates more of our personal and professional lives, user expectations for intuitive design have driven many consumer products, while medical equipment continues to have high training requirements. Not much is known about the usability and user experience associated with hospital monitoring equipment. This pilot project aimed to better understand and describe the user interface interaction and user experience with physiologic monitoring technology.Design: This was a prospective, descriptive, mixed-methods quality improvement project to analyze perceptions and task analyses of physiologic monitors.Methods: Following a survey of practice patterns and perceived abilities to accomplish key tasks, 10 voluntary experienced physician and nurse subjects were asked to perform a series of tasks in 7 domains of monitor operations on GE Monitoring equipment in a single institution. For each task analysis, data were collected on time to complete the task, the number of button pushes or clicks required to accomplish the task, economy of motion, and observed errors.Results: Although 60% of the participants reported incorporating monitoring data into patient care, 80% of participants preferred to receive monitoring data at the point of care (bedside). Average perceived central station usability is 5.3 out of 10 (ten is easiest).ConclusionsHigh variability exists in monitoring station interaction performance among those participating in this project. Alarms were almost universally silenced without cognitive recognition of the alarm state. Education related to monitoring operations appeared largely absent in this sample. Most users perceived the interface to not be intuitive, complaining of multiple layers and steps for data retrieval. These clinicians report real-time monitoring helpful for abrupt changes in condition like arrhythmias; however, reviewing alarms is not prioritized as valuable due to frequent false alarms. Participants requested exporting monitoring data to electronic medical records. Much research is needed to develop best practices for display of real-time information, organization and filtering of meaningful data, and simplified ways to find information.

AB - Background: As technology infiltrates more of our personal and professional lives, user expectations for intuitive design have driven many consumer products, while medical equipment continues to have high training requirements. Not much is known about the usability and user experience associated with hospital monitoring equipment. This pilot project aimed to better understand and describe the user interface interaction and user experience with physiologic monitoring technology.Design: This was a prospective, descriptive, mixed-methods quality improvement project to analyze perceptions and task analyses of physiologic monitors.Methods: Following a survey of practice patterns and perceived abilities to accomplish key tasks, 10 voluntary experienced physician and nurse subjects were asked to perform a series of tasks in 7 domains of monitor operations on GE Monitoring equipment in a single institution. For each task analysis, data were collected on time to complete the task, the number of button pushes or clicks required to accomplish the task, economy of motion, and observed errors.Results: Although 60% of the participants reported incorporating monitoring data into patient care, 80% of participants preferred to receive monitoring data at the point of care (bedside). Average perceived central station usability is 5.3 out of 10 (ten is easiest).ConclusionsHigh variability exists in monitoring station interaction performance among those participating in this project. Alarms were almost universally silenced without cognitive recognition of the alarm state. Education related to monitoring operations appeared largely absent in this sample. Most users perceived the interface to not be intuitive, complaining of multiple layers and steps for data retrieval. These clinicians report real-time monitoring helpful for abrupt changes in condition like arrhythmias; however, reviewing alarms is not prioritized as valuable due to frequent false alarms. Participants requested exporting monitoring data to electronic medical records. Much research is needed to develop best practices for display of real-time information, organization and filtering of meaningful data, and simplified ways to find information.

KW - HCI

KW - health informatics

KW - UX

KW - medical devices

U2 - 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2015.08.032

DO - 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2015.08.032

M3 - Article

VL - 48

SP - 982

EP - 987

JO - Journal of Electrocardiology

T2 - Journal of Electrocardiology

JF - Journal of Electrocardiology

SN - 0022-0736

IS - 6

ER -