Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Apr 1;24(e1):e35-e39.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw092.

A framework for evaluating electronic health record vendor user-centered design and usability testing processes

Raj M Ratwani  1   2 , A Zachary Hettinger  1   2 , Allison Kosydar  1 , Rollin J Fairbanks  1   2 , Michael L Hodgkins  3
Affiliations

A framework for evaluating electronic health record vendor user-centered design and usability testing processes

Raj M Ratwani et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: Currently, there are few resources for electronic health record (EHR) purchasers and end users to understand the usability processes employed by EHR vendors during product design and development. We developed a framework, based on human factors literature and industry standards, to systematically evaluate the user-centered design processes and usability testing methods used by EHR vendors.

Materials and methods: We reviewed current usability certification requirements and the human factors literature to develop a 15-point framework for evaluating EHR products. The framework is based on 3 dimensions: user-centered design process, summative testing methodology, and summative testing results. Two vendor usability reports were retrieved from the Office of the National Coordinator's Certified Health IT Product List and were evaluated using the framework.

Results: One vendor scored low on the framework (5 pts) while the other vendor scored high on the framework (15 pts). The 2 scored vendor reports demonstrate the framework's ability to discriminate between the variabilities in vendor processes and to determine which vendors are meeting best practices.

Discussion: The framework provides a method to more easily comprehend EHR vendors' usability processes and serves to highlight where EHR vendors may be falling short in terms of best practices. The framework provides a greater level of transparency for both purchasers and end users of EHRs.

Conclusion: The framework highlights the need for clearer certification requirements and suggests that the authorized certification bodies that examine vendor usability reports may need to be provided with clearer guidance.

Keywords: electronic health records; health information technology; human factors; usability.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Likourezos A, Chalfin DB, Murphy DG, Sommer B, Darcy K, Davidson SJ. Physician and nurse satisfaction with an Electronic Medical Record system. J Emerg Med. 2004;274:419–424. - PubMed
    1. McGinn CA, Grenier S, Duplantie J, et al. Comparison of user groups’ perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: a systematic review. BMC Med. 2011;91:46. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Friedberg MW, Chen PG, Van Busum KR, et al. Factors Affecting Physician Professional Satisfaction and Their Implications for Patient Care, Health Systems, and Health Policy RAND Corporation: Santa Monica, CA; 2013. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meeks DW, Smith MW, Taylor L, Sittig DF, Scott JM, Singh H. An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety concerns. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014; 21:1–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Benda NC, Meadors ML, Hettinger AZ, Ratwani RM. Emergency physician task switching increases with the introduction of a commercial electronic health record. Ann Emerg Med. 2015. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019606441501104X. Accessed October 13, 2015. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources