Usability Testing of Situation Awareness Clinical Decision Support in the Intensive Care Unit.

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Applied Clinical Informatics Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1055/a-2272-6184
Matthew J Molloy, Matthew Zackoff, Annika Gifford, Philip Hagedorn, Ken Tegtmeyer, Maria T Britto, Maya Dewan
{"title":"Usability Testing of Situation Awareness Clinical Decision Support in the Intensive Care Unit.","authors":"Matthew J Molloy, Matthew Zackoff, Annika Gifford, Philip Hagedorn, Ken Tegtmeyer, Maria T Britto, Maya Dewan","doi":"10.1055/a-2272-6184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong> Our objective was to evaluate the usability of an automated clinical decision support (CDS) tool previously implemented in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) to promote shared situation awareness among the medical team to prevent serious safety events within children's hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> We conducted a mixed-methods usability evaluation of a CDS tool in a PICU at a large, urban, quaternary, free-standing children's hospital in the Midwest. Quantitative assessment was done using the system usability scale (SUS), while qualitative assessment involved think-aloud usability testing. The SUS was scored according to survey guidelines. For think-aloud testing, task times were calculated, and means and standard deviations were determined, stratified by role. Qualitative feedback from participants and moderator observations were summarized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Fifty-one PICU staff members, including physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, and respiratory therapists, completed the SUS, while ten participants underwent think-aloud usability testing. The overall median usability score was 87.5 (interquartile range: 80-95), with over 96% rating the tool's usability as \"good\" or \"excellent.\" Task completion times ranged from 2 to 92 seconds, with the quickest completion for reviewing high-risk criteria and the slowest for adding to high-risk criteria. Observations and participant responses from think-aloud testing highlighted positive aspects of learnability and clear display of complex information that is easily accessed, as well as opportunities for improvement in tool integration into clinical workflows.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> The PICU Warning Tool demonstrates good usability in the critical care setting. This study demonstrates the value of postimplementation usability testing in identifying opportunities for continued improvement of CDS tools.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":" ","pages":"327-334"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062760/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2272-6184","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective:  Our objective was to evaluate the usability of an automated clinical decision support (CDS) tool previously implemented in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) to promote shared situation awareness among the medical team to prevent serious safety events within children's hospitals.

Methods:  We conducted a mixed-methods usability evaluation of a CDS tool in a PICU at a large, urban, quaternary, free-standing children's hospital in the Midwest. Quantitative assessment was done using the system usability scale (SUS), while qualitative assessment involved think-aloud usability testing. The SUS was scored according to survey guidelines. For think-aloud testing, task times were calculated, and means and standard deviations were determined, stratified by role. Qualitative feedback from participants and moderator observations were summarized.

Results:  Fifty-one PICU staff members, including physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, and respiratory therapists, completed the SUS, while ten participants underwent think-aloud usability testing. The overall median usability score was 87.5 (interquartile range: 80-95), with over 96% rating the tool's usability as "good" or "excellent." Task completion times ranged from 2 to 92 seconds, with the quickest completion for reviewing high-risk criteria and the slowest for adding to high-risk criteria. Observations and participant responses from think-aloud testing highlighted positive aspects of learnability and clear display of complex information that is easily accessed, as well as opportunities for improvement in tool integration into clinical workflows.

Conclusion:  The PICU Warning Tool demonstrates good usability in the critical care setting. This study demonstrates the value of postimplementation usability testing in identifying opportunities for continued improvement of CDS tools.

重症监护室情境感知临床决策支持的可用性测试。
目的我们的目的是评估之前在儿科重症监护室(PICU)实施的自动化临床决策支持(CDS)工具的可用性,该工具旨在促进医疗团队的共同情况意识,以防止儿童医院发生严重安全事件:我们采用混合方法对中西部一家大型城市四级独立儿童医院 PICU 的 CDS 工具进行了可用性评估。定量评估采用系统可用性量表,而定性评估则包括畅想可用性测试。系统可用性量表根据调查指南进行评分。对于思考-朗读测试,按角色分层计算了任务时间,并确定了平均值和标准偏差。对参与者的定性反馈和主持人的观察结果进行了总结:51 名 PICU 工作人员(包括医生、高级医疗服务提供者、护士和呼吸治疗师)完成了系统可用性量表,10 名参与者进行了高声思考可用性测试。总体可用性得分中位数为 87.5(IQR:80-95),96% 以上的人将工具的可用性评为 "良好 "或 "优秀"。任务完成时间从 2 秒到 92 秒不等,其中审核高风险标准的完成时间最快,添加高风险标准的完成时间最慢。通过观察和参与者的回答,我们从 "思考-大声说 "测试中发现了一些积极的方面,如易学性、复杂信息的清晰显示、易获取性,以及将工具整合到临床工作流程中的改进机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Clinical Informatics
Applied Clinical Informatics MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信