Cargando…

A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system

BACKGROUND: None of the evaluation methods can identify all the usability problems of information systems. So far, no study has sufficiently investigated the potential of a combination of these methods to identify usability problems. The present study aimed at examining the potential for combining t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khajouei, Reza, Farahani, Fatemeh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7199374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32366248
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-1083-6
_version_ 1783529146137182208
author Khajouei, Reza
Farahani, Fatemeh
author_facet Khajouei, Reza
Farahani, Fatemeh
author_sort Khajouei, Reza
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: None of the evaluation methods can identify all the usability problems of information systems. So far, no study has sufficiently investigated the potential of a combination of these methods to identify usability problems. The present study aimed at examining the potential for combining two commonly utilized user-based and expert-based methods to evaluate the usability of a hospital information system. METHODS: Think aloud (TA) and Heuristic evaluation (HE) methods were used to identify the usability problems of two subsystems of the Social Security Electronic System in Iran. To this end, the problems were categorized into five groups based on ISO-Nielsen usability attributes. The Chi-square test was applied to compare the intended methods based on the total number of problems and the number of problems within each group, followed by utilizing the Mann-Whitney U test to compare the mean severity scores of these methods. RESULTS: The evaluation by combining these methods yielded 423 problems of which 75% varied between the methods. The two methods were significantly different in terms of the total number of problems, the number of problems in each usability group, and the mean severity of two satisfaction and efficiency attributes (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between the two methods based on the mean severity of problems and severity scores related to three usability attributes i.e., effectiveness, learnability, and error prevention (P > 0.05). In addition, the mean severity of problems identified by each method was at the “Major” level. CONCLUSION: Based on the results, although the mean severity scores of the identified problems were not significantly different, these methods identify heterogeneous problems. HE mainly identifies problems related to satisfaction, learnability, and error prevention while TA detects problems related to effectiveness and efficiency attributes. Therefore, using a combination of these two methods can identify a wider range of usability problems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7199374
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71993742020-05-08 A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system Khajouei, Reza Farahani, Fatemeh BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: None of the evaluation methods can identify all the usability problems of information systems. So far, no study has sufficiently investigated the potential of a combination of these methods to identify usability problems. The present study aimed at examining the potential for combining two commonly utilized user-based and expert-based methods to evaluate the usability of a hospital information system. METHODS: Think aloud (TA) and Heuristic evaluation (HE) methods were used to identify the usability problems of two subsystems of the Social Security Electronic System in Iran. To this end, the problems were categorized into five groups based on ISO-Nielsen usability attributes. The Chi-square test was applied to compare the intended methods based on the total number of problems and the number of problems within each group, followed by utilizing the Mann-Whitney U test to compare the mean severity scores of these methods. RESULTS: The evaluation by combining these methods yielded 423 problems of which 75% varied between the methods. The two methods were significantly different in terms of the total number of problems, the number of problems in each usability group, and the mean severity of two satisfaction and efficiency attributes (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between the two methods based on the mean severity of problems and severity scores related to three usability attributes i.e., effectiveness, learnability, and error prevention (P > 0.05). In addition, the mean severity of problems identified by each method was at the “Major” level. CONCLUSION: Based on the results, although the mean severity scores of the identified problems were not significantly different, these methods identify heterogeneous problems. HE mainly identifies problems related to satisfaction, learnability, and error prevention while TA detects problems related to effectiveness and efficiency attributes. Therefore, using a combination of these two methods can identify a wider range of usability problems. BioMed Central 2020-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7199374/ /pubmed/32366248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-1083-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Khajouei, Reza
Farahani, Fatemeh
A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
title A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
title_full A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
title_fullStr A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
title_full_unstemmed A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
title_short A combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
title_sort a combination of two methods for evaluating the usability of a hospital information system
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7199374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32366248
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-1083-6
work_keys_str_mv AT khajoueireza acombinationoftwomethodsforevaluatingtheusabilityofahospitalinformationsystem
AT farahanifatemeh acombinationoftwomethodsforevaluatingtheusabilityofahospitalinformationsystem