Interactive Visual Displays for Interpreting the Results of Clinical Trials: Formative Evaluation With Case Vignettes.

BACKGROUND: At the point of care, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is underutilized in helping clinicians meet their information needs. OBJECTIVE: To design interactive visual displays to help clinicians interpret and compare the results of relevant RCTs for the management of a specific patient, and to conduct a formative evaluation with physicians comparing interactive visual versus narrative displays. METHODS: We followed a user-centered and iterative design process succeeded by development of information display prototypes as a Web-based application. We then used a within-subjects design with 20 participants (8 attendings and 12 residents) to evaluate the usability and problem-solving impact of the information displays. We compared subjects' perceptions of the interactive visual displays versus narrative abstracts. RESULTS: The resulting interactive visual displays present RCT results side-by-side according to the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework. Study participants completed 19 usability tasks in 3 to 11 seconds with a success rate of 78% to 100%. Participants favored the interactive visual displays over narrative abstracts according to perceived efficiency, effectiveness, effort, user experience and preference (all P values <.001). CONCLUSIONS: When interpreting and applying RCT findings to case vignettes, physicians preferred interactive graphical and PICO-framework-based information displays that enable direct comparison of the results from multiple RCTs compared to the traditional narrative and study-centered format. Future studies should investigate the use of interactive visual displays to support clinical decision making in care settings and their effect on clinician and patient outcomes.

Why aren't they happy? An analysis of end-user satisfaction with Electronic health records.

Introduction. Implementations of electronic health records (EHR) have been met with mixed outcome reviews. Complaints about these systems have led to many attempts to have useful measures of end-user satisfaction. However, most user satisfaction assessments do not focus on high-level reasoning, despite the complaints of many physicians. Our study attempts to identify some of these determinants. Method. We developed a user satisfaction survey instrument, based on pre-identified and important clinical and non-clinical clinician tasks. We surveyed a sample of in-patient physicians and focused on using exploratory factor analyses to identify underlying high-level cognitive tasks. We used the results to create unique, orthogonal variables representative of latent structure predictive of user satisfaction. Results. Our findings identified 3 latent high-level tasks that were associated with end-user satisfaction: a) High- level clinical reasoning b) Communicate/coordinate care and c) Follow the rules/compliance. Conclusion: We were able to successfully identify latent variables associated with satisfaction. Identification of communicability and high-level clinical reasoning as important factors determining user satisfaction can lead to development and design of more usable electronic health records with higher user satisfaction.