Dataset Information

Establishing a usability cut-point for the health information technology usability evaluation scale (Health-ITUES).

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES) is a validated and reliable instrument to evaluate usability of information technology (IT) tools. In this study, we aimed to establish the optimal cut-point of the Health-ITUES to identify usability of IT tools.

Methods

Adult participants were recruited to a trial evaluating a mobile app for self-managing HIV. Participants completed the Health-ITUES at the 3- and 6-month follow-up. Health-ITUES is a 20-item questionnaire that assesses four subscales: impact, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user control. The total score ranged from 1 to 5 and a higher score indicates greater usability. App use was defined as the proportion of activities completed by participants in both study arms. The selection of an optimal cut-point involved a series of multiple linear regression models with 500 bootstrap replications to examine the relationship between the Health-ITUES total score and app use, controlling for potential covariates.

Results

We included 158 participants; mean age was 49.7 years (SD 10.3), 71% were African American/Black, and 72% were non-Hispanic. Mean Health-ITUES total scores at 3 and 6 months were 4.39 (SD 0.75) and 4.43 (SD 0.75), respectively. App use completedby participants from baseline to the 3-month follow-up visits was 0.61 (SD 0.36, range 0-1.72) and from 3-month to the 6-month follow-up visits was 0.51 (SD 0.37). Participants who reported greater Health-ITUES total score completed more activities [β = 0.18, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.10-0.27]. The optimal cut-point of 4.32 (95% CI: 4.25-4.56) yielded the lowest p-value to identify usability of IT tools.

Conclusions

In this study of adults with HIV, we identified an optimal cut-point of 4.32 on the Health-ITUES total score to define usability. Further studies are needed to validate this cut-point.

SUBMITTER: Loh KP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8903058 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Establishing a usability cut-point for the health information technology usability evaluation scale (Health-ITUES).

Loh Kah Poh KP Liu Jianfang J Ganzhorn Sarah S Sanabria Gabriella G Schnall Rebecca R

International journal of medical informatics 20220205

<h4>Objective</h4>The Health Information Technology Usability Evaluation Scale (Health-ITUES) is a validated and reliable instrument to evaluate usability of information technology (IT) tools. In this study, we aimed to establish the optimal cut-point of the Health-ITUES to identify usability of IT tools.<h4>Methods</h4>Adult participants were recruited to a trial evaluating a mobile app for self-managing HIV. Participants completed the Health-ITUES at the 3- and 6-month follow-up. Health-ITUES ...[more]

PMID: 35144102

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe contribution of usability flaws to patient safety issues is acknowledged but not well-investigated. Free-text descriptions of incident reports may provide useful data to identify the connection between health information technology (HIT) usability flaws and patient safety.ObjectivesThis article examines the feasibility of using incident reports about HIT to learn about the usability flaws that affect patient safety. We posed three questions: (1) To what extent can we gain knowledge about usability issues from incident reports? (2) What types of usability flaws, related usage problems, and negative outcomes are reported in incidents reports? (3) What are the reported usability issues that give rise to patient safety issues?MethodsA sample of 359 reports from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database was examined. Descriptions of usability flaws, usage problems, and negative outcomes were extracted and categorized. A supplementary analysis was performed on the incidents which contained the full chain going from a usability flaw up to a patient safety issue to identify the usability issues that gave rise to patient safety incidents.ResultsA total of 249 reports were included. We found that incident reports can provide knowledge about usability flaws, usage problems, and negative outcomes. Thirty-six incidents report how usability flaws affected patient safety (ranging from incidents without consequence, to death) involving electronic patient scales, imaging systems, and HIT for medication management. The most significant class of involved usability flaws is related to the reliability, the understandability, and the availability of the clinical information.ConclusionIncidents reports involving HIT are an exploitable source of information to learn about usability flaws and their effects on patient safety. Results can be used to convince all stakeholders involved in the HIT system lifecycle that usability should be considered seriously to prevent patient safety incidents.

Project description:Objective Few community pharmacies have access to health information exchange (HIE) data. We conducted a first-of-its-kind usability evaluation of an HIE interface prototype (referred to throughout as the "HIE-Pioneer mock-up") developed with pharmacists and pharmacy technicians to aid future implementation in community pharmacies.Methods Community pharmacists and pharmacy technicians were recruited to complete usability evaluations with the HIE-Pioneer mock-up. Each usability evaluation lasted up to 60 minutes. System usability scale (SUS) scores were collected from each participant following each usability evaluation session and summarized with descriptive statistics. Usability evaluation videos were reviewed for common usability attributes, such as the impact of identified usability problems, learnability, and efficiency. Time on task, task success rates, and prototype utilization were also recorded.Results Sixteen total participants completed usability testing across three community pharmacies. The average SUS score was 69.7 (scale 0-100, where 100 is the best), with pharmacists on average reporting higher satisfaction than technicians (74.1 vs. 65.3, respectively). Altogether, we identified 23 distinct usability problems. Key problems identified included needed clarification in tool label names and accessibility of HIE links within the existing workflow. Overall, the usability of the HIE-Pioneer mock-up generally fostered pharmacy professionals' ease of learning and efficiency.Conclusion Our study identified key areas, and potential solutions, to improve the usability of the HIE-Pioneer mock-up. Overall, pharmacy professionals viewed the HIE-Pioneer mock-up positively, with good satisfaction ratings. The HIE-Pioneer mock-up provides a blueprint for future HIE implementation in community pharmacy settings, which would increase community pharmacy teams' access to HIE data nationwide. Community pharmacy access to bi-directional HIE is expected to improve communication among more health care professionals involved in patient care and equip pharmacy professionals with needed information for improved clinical decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundProblems in the usability of health information systems (HISs) are well acknowledged, but research still lacks a validated questionnaire for measuring and monitoring different dimensions of usability of HISs. Such questionnaires are needed not only for research but also for developing usability of HISs from the viewpoint of end-user experiences.ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop and test the validity of the questionnaire measuring the National Usability-Focused HIS-Scale (NuHISS) among a nationally representative sample of Finnish physicians.MethodsWe utilized 2 cross-sectional data collected from a random sample of Finnish physicians in 2014 (N=3781; of which 2340 [61.9%] were women) and 2017 (N=4018; of which 2604 [64.8%] were women). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (structural equation modeling [SEM]) were applied to test the structural validity of the NuHISS. As the concurrent validity measure, we used the self-reported overall quality of the electronic health record system (school grade) provided by the participants using marginal structural models.ResultsThe exploratory factor analyses with Varimax rotation suggested that the 7-factor solution did offer a good fit to the data in both samples (C2=2136.14 in 2014 and C2=2109.83 in 2017, both P<.001). Moreover, structural equation modelling analyses, using comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA), and Standardized Root Mean square Residual (SRMR), showed that the 7-factor solution provided an acceptable fit in both samples (CFI=0.92/0.91, TLI=0.92/0.91, NFI=0.92/0.91, RMSEA=0.048/0.049, and SRMR=0.040/0.039). In addition, concurrent validity of this solution was shown to be acceptable. Ease of use, but also all other dimensions, was especially associated with overall quality reports independent of measured confounders. The 7-factor solution included dimensions of technical quality, information quality, feedback, ease of use, benefits, internal collaboration, and cross-organizational collaboration.ConclusionsNuHISS provides a useful tool for measuring usability of HISs among physicians and offers a valid measure for monitoring the long-term development of HISs on a large scale. The relative importance of items needs to be assessed against national electronic health policy goals and complemented with items that have remained outside the NuHISS from the questionnaire when appropriate.

Project description:BackgroundNumerous studies have revealed widespread clinician frustration with the usability of electronic health records (EHRs) that is counterproductive to adoption of EHR systems to meet the aims of health-care reform. With poor system usability comes increased risk of negative unintended consequences. Usability issues could lead to user error and workarounds that have the potential to compromise patient safety and negatively impact the quality of care.[1] While there is ample research on EHR usability, there is little information on the usability of laboratory information systems (LISs). Yet, LISs facilitate the timely provision of a great deal of the information needed by physicians to make patient care decisions.[2] Medical and technical advances in genomics that require processing of an increased volume of complex laboratory data further underscore the importance of developing user-friendly LISs. This study aims to add to the body of knowledge on LIS usability.MethodsA survey was distributed among LIS users at hospitals across the United States. The survey consisted of the ten-item System Usability Scale (SUS). In addition, participants were asked to rate the ease of performing 24 common tasks with a LIS. Finally, respondents provided comments on what they liked and disliked about using the LIS to provide diagnostic insight into LIS perceived usability.ResultsThe overall mean SUS score of 59.7 for the LIS evaluated is significantly lower than the benchmark of 68 (P < 0.001). All LISs evaluated received mean SUS scores below 68 except for Orchard Harvest (78.7). While the years of experience using the LIS was found to be a statistically significant influence on mean SUS scores, the combined effect of years of experience and LIS used did not account for the statistically significant difference in the mean SUS score between Orchard Harvest and each of the other LISs evaluated.ConclusionsThe results of this study indicate that overall usability of LISs is poor. Usability lags that of systems evaluated across 446 usability surveys.

Project description:BackgroundThere are differences of opinion regarding the selection of the most practical usability evaluation method among different methods. The present study aimed to compare two expert-based evaluation methods in order to assess a nursing module as the most widely used module of a Hospital Information System (HIS).MethodsFive independent evaluators used the Heuristic Evaluation (HE) and Cognitive Walkthrough (CW) methods to evaluate the nursing module of Shafa HIS. In this regard, the number and severity of the recognized problems according to the usability attributes were compared using two evaluation methods.ResultsThe HE and CW evaluation methods resulted in the identification of 104 and 24 unique problems, respectively, of which 33.3% of recognized problems in the CW evaluation method overlapped with the HE method. The average severity of the recognized problems was considered to be minor (2.34) in the HE method and major (2.77) in the CW evaluation method. There was a significant difference in terms of the total number and average severity of the recognized problems by these methods (P < 0.001). Based on the usability attribute, the HE method identified a larger number of problems concerning all usability attributes, and a significant difference was observed in terms of the number of recognized problems in both methods for all attributes except 'memorability'. Also, there was a significant difference between the two methods based on the average severity of recognized problems only in terms of 'learnability'.ConclusionThe HE method identified more problems with lower average severity while the CW was able to recognize fewer problems with higher average severity. Regarding the evaluation goal, the HE method was able to be used to improve the effectiveness and satisfaction of the HIS. Furthermore, the CW evaluation method is recommended to identify usability problems with the highest average severity, especially in terms of 'learnability'.

Dataset Information

Establishing a usability cut-point for the health information technology usability evaluation scale (Health-ITUES).

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Establishing a usability cut-point for the health information technology usability evaluation scale (Health-ITUES).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets