Dataset Information

Comparison of two kinds of interface, based on guided navigation or usability principles, for improving the adoption of computerized decision support systems: application to the prescription of antibiotics.

ABSTRACT:

Context

It is important to consider the way in which information is presented by the interfaces of clinical decision support systems, to favor the adoption of these systems by physicians. Interface design can focus on decision processes (guided navigation) or usability principles.

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare these two approaches in terms of perceived usability, accuracy rate, and confidence in the system.

Materials and methods

We displayed clinical practice guidelines for antibiotic treatment via two types of interface, which we compared in a crossover design. General practitioners were asked to provide responses for 10 clinical cases and the System Usability Scale (SUS) for each interface. We assessed SUS scores, the number of correct responses, and the confidence level for each interface.

Results

SUS score and percentage confidence were significantly higher for the interface designed according to usability principles (81 vs 51, p=0.00004, and 88.8% vs 80.7%, p=0.004). The percentage of correct responses was similar for the two interfaces.

Discussion/conclusion

The interface designed according to usability principles was perceived to be more usable and inspired greater confidence among physicians than the guided navigation interface. Consideration of usability principles in the construction of an interface--in particular 'effective information presentation', 'consistency', 'efficient interactions', 'effective use of language', and 'minimizing cognitive load'--seemed to improve perceived usability and confidence in the system.

SUBMITTER: Tsopra R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3957402 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of two kinds of interface, based on guided navigation or usability principles, for improving the adoption of computerized decision support systems: application to the prescription of antibiotics.

Tsopra Rosy R Jais Jean-Philippe JP Venot Alain A Duclos Catherine C

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 20130905 e1

<h4>Context</h4>It is important to consider the way in which information is presented by the interfaces of clinical decision support systems, to favor the adoption of these systems by physicians. Interface design can focus on decision processes (guided navigation) or usability principles.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to compare these two approaches in terms of perceived usability, accuracy rate, and confidence in the system.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We displayed clinical practi ...[more]

PMID: 24008427

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPharmacogenomics (PGx) is positioned to have a widespread impact on the practice of medicine, yet physician acceptance is low. The presentation of context-specific PGx information, in the form of clinical decision support (CDS) alerts embedded in a computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system, can aid uptake. Usability evaluations can inform optimal design, which, in turn, can spur adoption.ObjectivesThe study objectives were to: (1) evaluate an early prototype, commercial CPOE system with PGx-CDS alerts in a simulated environment, (2) identify potential improvements to the system user interface, and (3) understand the contexts under which PGx knowledge embedded in an electronic health record is useful to prescribers.MethodsUsing a mixed methods approach, we presented seven cardiologists and three oncologists with five hypothetical clinical case scenarios. Each scenario featured a drug for which a gene encoding drug metabolizing enzyme required consideration of dosage adjustment. We used Morae(®) to capture comments and on-screen movements as participants prescribed each drug. In addition to PGx-CDS alerts, 'Infobutton(®)' and 'Evidence' icons provided participants with clinical knowledge resources to aid decision-making.ResultsNine themes emerged. Five suggested minor improvements to the CPOE user interface; two suggested presenting PGx information through PGx-CDS alerts using an 'Infobutton' or 'Evidence' icon. The remaining themes were strong recommendations to provide succinct, relevant guidelines and dosing recommendations of phenotypic information from credible and trustworthy sources; any more information was overwhelming. Participants' median rating of PGx-CDS system usability was 2 on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 7 (strongly disagree).ConclusionsUsability evaluation results suggest that participants considered PGx information important for improving prescribing decisions; and that they would incorporate PGx-CDS when information is presented in relevant and useful ways.

Project description:Shared decision making (SDM) is important in achieving patient-centered care. SDM tools such as decision aids are intended to inform the patient. When used to assist in decision making between treatments, decision aids have been shown to reduce decisional conflict, increase ease of decision making, and increase modification of previous decisions.The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the impact of computerized decision aids on patient-centered outcomes related to SDM for seriously ill patients.PubMed and Scopus databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the impact of computerized decision aids on patient-centered outcomes and SDM in serious illness. Six RCTs were identified and data were extracted on study population, design, and results. Risk of bias was assessed by a modified Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials.Six RCTs tested decision tools in varying serious illnesses. Three studies compared different computerized decision aids against each other and a control. All but one study demonstrated improvement in at least one patient-centered outcome. Computerized decision tools may reduce unnecessary treatment in patients with low disease severity in comparison with informational pamphlets. Additionally, electronic health record (EHR) portals may provide the opportunity to manage care from the home for individuals affected by illness. The quality of decision aids is of great importance. Furthermore, satisfaction with the use of tools is associated with increased patient satisfaction and reduced decisional conflict. Finally, patients may benefit from computerized decision tools without the need for increased physician involvement.Most computerized decision aids improved at least one patient-centered outcome. All RCTs identified were at a High Risk of Bias or Unclear Risk of Bias. Effort should be made to improve the quality of RCTs testing SDM aids in serious illness.

Dataset Information

Comparison of two kinds of interface, based on guided navigation or usability principles, for improving the adoption of computerized decision support systems: application to the prescription of antibiotics.

Context

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion/conclusion

Publications

Comparison of two kinds of interface, based on guided navigation or usability principles, for improving the adoption of computerized decision support systems: application to the prescription of antibiotics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets