Usability Testing of a Complex Clinical Decision Support Tool in the Emergency Department: Lessons Learned
- PMID: 27025540
- PMCID: PMC4797671
- DOI: 10.2196/humanfactors.4537
Usability Testing of a Complex Clinical Decision Support Tool in the Emergency Department: Lessons Learned
Abstract
Background: As the electronic health record (EHR) becomes the preferred documentation tool across medical practices, health care organizations are pushing for clinical decision support systems (CDSS) to help bring clinical decision support (CDS) tools to the forefront of patient-physician interactions. A CDSS is integrated into the EHR and allows physicians to easily utilize CDS tools. However, often CDSS are integrated into the EHR without an initial phase of usability testing, resulting in poor adoption rates. Usability testing is important because it evaluates a CDSS by testing it on actual users. This paper outlines the usability phase of a study, which will test the impact of integration of the Wells CDSS for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis into a large urban emergency department, where workflow is often chaotic and high stakes decisions are frequently made. We hypothesize that conducting usability testing prior to integration of the Wells score into an emergency room EHR will result in increased adoption rates by physicians.
Objective: The objective of the study was to conduct usability testing for the integration of the Wells clinical prediction rule into a tertiary care center's emergency department EHR.
Methods: We conducted usability testing of a CDS tool in the emergency department EHR. The CDS tool consisted of the Wells rule for PE in the form of a calculator and was triggered off computed tomography (CT) orders or patients' chief complaint. The study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Queens, New York. There were seven residents that were recruited and participated in two phases of usability testing. The usability testing employed a "think aloud" method and "near-live" clinical simulation, where care providers interacted with standardized patients enacting a clinical scenario. Both phases were audiotaped, video-taped, and had screen-capture software activated for onscreen recordings.
Results: Phase I: Data from the "think-aloud" phase of the study showed an overall positive outlook on the Wells tool in assessing a patient for a PE diagnosis. Subjects described the tool as "well-organized" and "better than clinical judgment". Changes were made to improve tool placement into the EHR to make it optimal for decision-making, auto-populating boxes, and minimizing click fatigue. Phase II: After incorporating the changes noted in Phase 1, the participants noted tool improvements. There was less toggling between screens, they had all the clinical information required to complete the tool, and were able to complete the patient visit efficiently. However, an optimal location for triggering the tool remained controversial.
Conclusions: This study successfully combined "think-aloud" protocol analysis with "near-live" clinical simulations in a usability evaluation of a CDS tool that will be implemented into the emergency room environment. Both methods proved useful in the assessment of the CDS tool and allowed us to refine tool usability and workflow.
Keywords: Wells criteria; clinical decision support; clinical prediction rules; emergency department; pulmonary embolism; usability testing.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest: None declared.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Integrating usability testing and think-aloud protocol analysis with "near-live" clinical simulations in evaluating clinical decision support.Int J Med Inform. 2012 Nov;81(11):761-72. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.02.009. Epub 2012 Mar 27. Int J Med Inform. 2012. PMID: 22456088
-
Usability testing of Avoiding Diabetes Thru Action Plan Targeting (ADAPT) decision support for integrating care-based counseling of pre-diabetes in an electronic health record.Int J Med Inform. 2014 Sep;83(9):636-47. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.05.002. Epub 2014 May 23. Int J Med Inform. 2014. PMID: 24981988 Free PMC article.
-
Live Usability Testing of Two Complex Clinical Decision Support Tools: Observational Study.JMIR Hum Factors. 2019 Apr 15;6(2):e12471. doi: 10.2196/12471. JMIR Hum Factors. 2019. PMID: 30985283 Free PMC article.
-
A Scoping Review of Integrated Medical Devices and Clinical Decision Support in the Acute Care Setting.Appl Clin Inform. 2022 Oct;13(5):1223-1236. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1759513. Epub 2022 Dec 28. Appl Clin Inform. 2022. PMID: 36577503 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Clinical Decision Support Systems for Triage in the Emergency Department using Intelligent Systems: a Review.Artif Intell Med. 2020 Jan;102:101762. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2019.101762. Epub 2019 Nov 17. Artif Intell Med. 2020. PMID: 31980099 Review.
Cited by
-
Retrospective analysis of the human-centered design process used to develop a clinical decision support in the emergency department: PE Dx Study Part 2.Hum Factors Health. 2023 Dec;4:Article 100055. doi: 10.1016/j.hfh.2023.100055. Epub 2023 Sep 30. Hum Factors Health. 2023. PMID: 38774123
-
Managing Resource Utilization Cost of Laboratory Tests for Patients on Chemotherapy in Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare.Glob J Qual Saf Healthc. 2023 Nov 24;6(4):111-116. doi: 10.36401/JQSH-23-9. eCollection 2023 Nov. Glob J Qual Saf Healthc. 2023. PMID: 38404459 Free PMC article.
-
Usability Testing of Situation Awareness Clinical Decision Support in the Intensive Care Unit.Appl Clin Inform. 2024 Mar;15(2):327-334. doi: 10.1055/a-2272-6184. Epub 2024 Feb 20. Appl Clin Inform. 2024. PMID: 38378044
-
How Clinicians Decide? Exploring Complexity of Antibiotic Prescribing in Emergency Departments Using Video-Reflexive Ethnography.Qual Health Res. 2023 Dec;33(14):1333-1348. doi: 10.1177/10497323231198144. Epub 2023 Oct 23. Qual Health Res. 2023. PMID: 37870924 Free PMC article.
-
Integrating Clinical Decision Support Into Electronic Health Record Systems Using a Novel Platform (EvidencePoint): Developmental Study.JMIR Form Res. 2023 Oct 19;7:e44065. doi: 10.2196/44065. JMIR Form Res. 2023. PMID: 37856193 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Drescher FS, Chandrika S, Weir ID, Weintraub JT, Berman L, Lee R, Van Buskirk Patricia D. Wang Y, Adewunmi A, Fine JM. Effectiveness and acceptability of a computerized decision support system using modified Wells criteria for evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Emerg Med. 2011 Jun;57(6):613–621. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.09.018. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Elwyn G, Légaré France, van der Weijden Trudy. Edwards A, May C. Arduous implementation: Does the Normalisation Process Model explain why it's so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice. Implement Sci. 2008;3:57. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-57. http://www.implementationscience.com/content/3//57 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Randolph AG, Haynes RB, Wyatt JC, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature: XVIII. How to use an article evaluating the clinical impact of a computer-based clinical decision support system. JAMA. 1999 Jul 7;282(1):67–74. - PubMed
-
- McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, Naylor CD, Stiell IG, Richardson WS. Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: How to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 2000 Jul 5;284(1):79–84. - PubMed
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
