Post-deployment usability evaluation of a radiology workstation

OBJECTIVES To determine the number, nature and severity of usability issues radiologists encounter while using a commercially available radiology workstation in clinical practice, and to assess how well the results of a pre-deployment usability evaluation of this workstation generalize to clinical practice. METHODS The usability evaluation consisted of semi-structured interviews and observations of twelve users using the workstation during their daily work. Usability issues and positive usability findings were documented. Each issue was given a severity rating and its root cause was determined. Results were compared to the results of a pre-deployment usability evaluation of the same workstation. RESULTS Ninety-two usability issues were identified, ranging from issues that cause minor frustration or delay, to issues that cause significant delays, prevent users from completing tasks, or even pose a potential threat to patient safety. The results of the pre-deployment usability evaluation had limited generalizability to clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that radiologists encountered a large number and a wide variety of usability issues when using a commercially available radiology workstation in clinical practice. This underlines the need for effective usability engineering in radiology. Given the limitations of pre-deployment usability evaluation in radiology, which were confirmed by our finding that the results of a pre-deployment usability evaluation of this workstation had limited generalizability to clinical practice, it is vital that radiology workstation vendors devote significant resources to usability engineering efforts before deployment of their workstation, and to continue these efforts after the workstation is deployed in a hospital.

[1]  Jeffrey Rubin,et al.  Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests , 1994 .

[2]  David M. Nichols,et al.  Participatory usability: supporting proactive users , 2003, CHINZ '03.

[3]  Reza Khajouei,et al.  Usability Evaluation of Laboratory and Radiology Information Systems Integrated into a Hospital Information System , 2014, Journal of Medical Systems.

[4]  Fokie Cnossen,et al.  Merits of usability testing for PACS selection , 2014, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[5]  Cord Spreckelsen,et al.  Black Box Integration of Computer-Aided Diagnosis into PACS Deserves a Second Chance: Results of a Usability Study Concerning Bone Age Assessment , 2013, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[6]  Tovi Grossman,et al.  Post-deployment usability: a survey of current practices , 2011, CHI.

[7]  Georg Langs,et al.  User-oriented evaluation of a medical image retrieval system for radiologists , 2015, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[8]  Robert A. Virzi,et al.  Refining the Test Phase of Usability Evaluation: How Many Subjects Is Enough? , 1992 .

[9]  Michael Galanski,et al.  PACS Workstations 2000: Evaluation, Usability and Performance , 2000, EuroPACS.

[10]  S. Wildermuth,et al.  Evaluation of radiological workstations and web-browser-based image distribution clients for a PACS project in hands-on workshops , 2004, European Radiology.

[11]  Miss A.O. Penney (b) , 1974, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[12]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  The usability engineering life cycle , 1992, Computer.

[13]  Peter M. A. van Ooijen,et al.  Comparing Four Touch-Based Interaction Techniques for an Image-Based Audience Response System , 2015, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[14]  Fokie Cnossen,et al.  Adaptive support for user interface customization: a study in radiology , 2015, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[15]  Henry Been-Lirn Duh,et al.  Usability evaluation for mobile device: a comparison of laboratory and field tests , 2006, Mobile HCI.

[16]  Jan Stage,et al.  It's worth the hassle!: the added value of evaluating the usability of mobile systems in the field , 2006, NordiCHI '06.

[17]  Fokie Cnossen,et al.  Pattern mining of user interaction logs for a post-deployment usability evaluation of a radiology PACS client , 2016, Int. J. Medical Informatics.