Striking a balance between usability and quality control in electronic health records

Abstract

Background: This project is the first formal usability review of the hybrid electronic medical registry (HEMR) since its implementation in 2012.
Methods: A synchronous usability evaluation by novice operators was followed by a survey of veteran users. The usability evaluation was done by moderated think-aloud interview while completing tasks for a mock patient. The veteran survey was paper-based and focused on satisfaction of the system.
Results: A total of 141 comments on system errors were identified by the novice doctors. These consisted of 123 unique problems, of which three were hardware faults and were thus excluded. The identified issues were categorised into errors of control (27%), minimalist (21%), error (17%), match (13%), flexibility, visibility and consistency (9% each), and history (4%). Every unique usability violation was evaluated by the three experts who agreed that 82 of the 141 errors (58%) were valid and applicable. The other 59 items were rejected, not only because of the inability to reproduce some errors or programme shortcomings, but also because a series of “hurdles” were purposely included in the software to decrease cognitive dissonance and reduce error by the users. The survey of veteran users showed high levels of contentment with the system with regards to efficiency, satisfaction and preference.
Conclusion: Despite many usability complaints by novices, almost half of them were rejected. Although usability in electronic health systems is important, it can often be sacrificed for more imperative aims such as safety, error filtering and clinical decision support.