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 Aug:104:56-64.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.05.004. Epub 2017 May 10.

User-centered design to improve clinical decision support in primary care

Affiliations

User-centered design to improve clinical decision support in primary care

Julian Brunner et al. Int J Med Inform. 2017 Aug.

Abstract

Background: A growing literature has demonstrated the ability of user-centered design to make clinical decision support systems more effective and easier to use. However, studies of user-centered design have rarely examined more than a handful of sites at a time, and have frequently neglected the implementation climate and organizational resources that influence clinical decision support. The inclusion of such factors was identified by a systematic review as "the most important improvement that can be made in health IT evaluations."

Objectives: (1) Identify the prevalence of four user-centered design practices at United States Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics and assess the perceived utility of clinical decision support at those clinics; (2) Evaluate the association between those user-centered design practices and the perceived utility of clinical decision support.

Methods: We analyzed clinic-level survey data collected in 2006-2007 from 170 VA primary care clinics. We examined four user-centered design practices: 1) pilot testing, 2) provider satisfaction assessment, 3) formal usability assessment, and 4) analysis of impact on performance improvement. We used a regression model to evaluate the association between user-centered design practices and the perceived utility of clinical decision support, while accounting for other important factors at those clinics, including implementation climate, available resources, and structural characteristics. We also examined associations separately at community-based clinics and at hospital-based clinics.

Results: User-centered design practices for clinical decision support varied across clinics: 74% conducted pilot testing, 62% conducted provider satisfaction assessment, 36% conducted a formal usability assessment, and 79% conducted an analysis of impact on performance improvement. Overall perceived utility of clinical decision support was high, with a mean rating of 4.17 (±.67) out of 5 on a composite measure. "Analysis of impact on performance improvement" was the only user-centered design practice significantly associated with perceived utility of clinical decision support, b=.47 (p<.001). This association was present in hospital-based clinics, b=.34 (p<.05), but was stronger at community-based clinics, b=.61 (p<.001).

Conclusions: Our findings are highly supportive of the practice of analyzing the impact of clinical decision support on performance metrics. This was the most common user-centered design practice in our study, and was the practice associated with higher perceived utility of clinical decision support. This practice may be particularly helpful at community-based clinics, which are typically less connected to VA medical center resources.

Keywords: Clinical decision support; Human factors; Usability; User-centered design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Author Contributions

Julian Brunner conceived and designed the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, and wrote the manuscript.

Emmeline Chuang assisted in study design and in the analysis and interpretation of the data, revised the manuscript for important intellectual content, and approved the final version.

Caroline Goldzweig assisted in the analysis and interpretation of the data, revised the manuscript for important intellectual content, and approved the final version.

Cindy L. Cain assisted in the analysis and interpretation of the data, revised the manuscript for important intellectual content, and approved the final version.

Catherine Sugar assisted in the analysis and interpretation of the data, revised the manuscript for important intellectual content, and approved the final version.

Elizabeth M. Yano acquired the data, assisted in study design, assisted in the analysis and interpretation of the data, revised the manuscript for important intellectual content, and approved the final version.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CDS utility rated by primary care directors. n = 193. CPRS = Computerized Patient Record System

References

    1. Johnson CM, Johnson TR, Zhang J. A user-centered framework for redesigning health care interfaces. J Biomed Inform. 2005;38:75–87. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2004.11.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yen PY, Bakken S. Review of health information technology usability study methodologies. J Am Med Informatics Assoc. 2012;19:413–422. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2010-000020. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bright TJ, Wong A, Dhurjati R, Bristow E, Bastian L, Coeytaux RR, Samsa G, Hasselblad V, Williams JW, Musty MD, Wing L, Kendrick AS, Sanders GD, Lobach D. Effect of clinical decision-support systems: A systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:29–43. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-1-201207030-00450. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Harrison MI, Koppel R, Bar-Lev S. Unintended Consequences of Information Technologies in Health Care - An Interactive Sociothecnical Analysis. J Am Med Informatics Assoc. 2007:542–549. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2384. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Koppel R, Cohen A, Abaluck B, Localio AR, Kimmel SE, Strom BL. Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry Systems in Facilitating Medication Errors. J Am Med Assoc. 2013;293:1197–1203. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1197. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms