Why are digital health care systems still poorly designed, and why is health care practice not asking for more? Three paths toward a sustainable digital work environment
(2021) In Journal of Medical Internet Research 23(6).- Abstract
Knowledge of how to design digital systems that are ergonomically sound, high in usability, and optimized for the user, context, and task has existed for some time. Despite this, there are still too many examples of new digital health care systems that are poorly designed and that could negatively affect both the work environment of health care staff and patient safety. This could be because of a gap between the theoretical knowledge of design and ergonomics and the practical implementation of this knowledge in procuring and developing digital health care systems. Furthermore, discussions of digitalization are often at a general level and risk neglecting the nature of direct interaction with the digital system. This is problematic since... (More)
Knowledge of how to design digital systems that are ergonomically sound, high in usability, and optimized for the user, context, and task has existed for some time. Despite this, there are still too many examples of new digital health care systems that are poorly designed and that could negatively affect both the work environment of health care staff and patient safety. This could be because of a gap between the theoretical knowledge of design and ergonomics and the practical implementation of this knowledge in procuring and developing digital health care systems. Furthermore, discussions of digitalization are often at a general level and risk neglecting the nature of direct interaction with the digital system. This is problematic since it is at this detailed level that work environment and patient safety issues materialize in practice. In this paper, we illustrate such issues with two scenarios concerned with contemporary electronic health care records, based on field studies in two health care settings. We argue that current methods and tools for designing and evaluating digital systems in health care must cater both to the holistic level and to the details of interaction and ergonomics. It must also be acknowledged that health care professionals are neither designers nor engineers, so expectations of them during the development of digital systems must be realistic. We suggest three paths toward a more sustainable digital work environment in health care: (1) better tools for evaluating the digital work environment in the field; (2) generic formulations of qualitative requirements related to usability and for adaptation to the user, context, and task, to be used in procurement; and (3) the introduction of digital ergonomics as an embracing concept capturing several of the ergonomic challenges (including physical, cognitive, and organizational aspects) involved in implementing and using digital systems.
(Less)
- author
- Persson, Johanna LU and Rydenfält, Christofer LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2021-06
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Digital systems, Digital work environment, Electronic health records, Ergonomics, Human-centered design, Usability
- in
- Journal of Medical Internet Research
- volume
- 23
- issue
- 6
- article number
- e26694
- publisher
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:34156336
- scopus:85108784490
- ISSN
- 1438-8871
- DOI
- 10.2196/26694
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 9b0d5ebf-5f0d-44a4-a1c4-ea71823a7ea5
- date added to LUP
- 2021-08-23 12:36:57
- date last changed
- 2024-06-29 16:06:57
@article{9b0d5ebf-5f0d-44a4-a1c4-ea71823a7ea5,
abstract = {{<p>Knowledge of how to design digital systems that are ergonomically sound, high in usability, and optimized for the user, context, and task has existed for some time. Despite this, there are still too many examples of new digital health care systems that are poorly designed and that could negatively affect both the work environment of health care staff and patient safety. This could be because of a gap between the theoretical knowledge of design and ergonomics and the practical implementation of this knowledge in procuring and developing digital health care systems. Furthermore, discussions of digitalization are often at a general level and risk neglecting the nature of direct interaction with the digital system. This is problematic since it is at this detailed level that work environment and patient safety issues materialize in practice. In this paper, we illustrate such issues with two scenarios concerned with contemporary electronic health care records, based on field studies in two health care settings. We argue that current methods and tools for designing and evaluating digital systems in health care must cater both to the holistic level and to the details of interaction and ergonomics. It must also be acknowledged that health care professionals are neither designers nor engineers, so expectations of them during the development of digital systems must be realistic. We suggest three paths toward a more sustainable digital work environment in health care: (1) better tools for evaluating the digital work environment in the field; (2) generic formulations of qualitative requirements related to usability and for adaptation to the user, context, and task, to be used in procurement; and (3) the introduction of digital ergonomics as an embracing concept capturing several of the ergonomic challenges (including physical, cognitive, and organizational aspects) involved in implementing and using digital systems.</p>}},
author = {{Persson, Johanna and Rydenfält, Christofer}},
issn = {{1438-8871}},
keywords = {{Digital systems; Digital work environment; Electronic health records; Ergonomics; Human-centered design; Usability}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{6}},
publisher = {{JMIR Publications Inc.}},
series = {{Journal of Medical Internet Research}},
title = {{Why are digital health care systems still poorly designed, and why is health care practice not asking for more? Three paths toward a sustainable digital work environment}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/26694}},
doi = {{10.2196/26694}},
volume = {{23}},
year = {{2021}},
}