A comparative evaluation study of basic interaction techniques for PDAs in point-of-care situations

This qualitative usability evaluation study has compared interaction techniques of a paper based medical chart and three versions of a PDA based system, based on interaction with stylus, finger or hardware buttons. Users' preferences and opinions were collected from 56 simulated hospital ward rounds with 14 physicians. Despite a number of disadvantages compared to paper the users preferred PDA-based interaction techniques. Within the PDA-based interaction techniques the physicians' preferences showed large variations. Moreover, the techniques had different qualities in different situations. The study identifies 14 factors influencing the users' preference and shows how each interaction techniques accommodate each factor. This study can inform the design and choice of interaction techniques on new handheld point-of-care systems.

[1]  Claus Bossen,et al.  Mobility Work: The Spatial Dimension of Collaboration at a Hospital , 2005, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[2]  D. Roter,et al.  Electronic medical record use and physician-patient communication: an observational study of Israeli primary care encounters. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[3]  Ina Wagner,et al.  A web of fuzzy problems: confronting the ethical issues , 1993, CACM.

[4]  Shannon J. Lane,et al.  Bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making a Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Effectiveness of Hand Held Computers with Paper Methods for Data Collection , 2006 .

[5]  Jesper Kjeldskov,et al.  Is It Worth the Hassle? Exploring the Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Context-Aware Mobile Systems in the Field , 2004, Mobile HCI.

[6]  Marcus Sanchez Svensson,et al.  Configuring Awareness , 2002, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[7]  Dag Svanæs,et al.  Designing Pervasive Computing for Hospitals: Learning from the Media Affordances of Paper-Based Medication Charts , 2006, 2006 Pervasive Health Conference and Workshops.

[8]  C. Brodsky.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research , 1968 .

[9]  David R. Morse,et al.  Using while moving: HCI issues in fieldwork environments , 2000, TCHI.

[10]  K. El Emam,et al.  Who’s Using PDAs? Estimates of PDA Use by Health Care Providers: A Systematic Review of Surveys , 2006, Journal of medical Internet research.

[11]  William L. Bewley,et al.  Human factors testing in the design of Xerox's 8010 “Star” office workstation , 1983, CHI '83.

[12]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[13]  C. Heath,et al.  Body movement and speech in medical interaction: Postscript: the use of medical records and computers during the consultation , 1986 .

[14]  Ole Andreas Alsos.  Exploring interface metaphors for using handhelds and PCs together , 2005 .

[15]  Yngve Dahl,et al.  Toward a best practice for laboratory-based usability evaluations of mobile ICT for hospitals , 2008, NordiCHI.

[16]  Yan Xiao,et al.  A review and a framework of handheld computer adoption in healthcare , 2005, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[17]  Line Melby.  Prat, penn og papir : En sosiologisk analyse av medisinsk informasjonsbruk i en mobil praksis , 2007 .

[18]  A. Faxvaag,et al.  Doctors’ Concerns of PDAs in the Ward Round Situation , 2009, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[19]  Jennifer M. Macri,et al.  Direct Comparison of a Tablet Computer and a Personal Digital Assistant for Point-of-Care Documentation in Eye Care , 2005, AMIA.

[20]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[21]  Dag Svanæs,et al.  Usability testing of mobile ICT for clinical settings: Methodological and practical challenges , 2010, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[22]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .