Software Quality Evaluation of the Laboratory Information System Used in the Santa Catarina State Integrated Telemedicine and Telehealth System

A laboratory information system (LIS) manages information about patients, examinations, results, and quality control. In this context, software quality is important in order to prevent risks for the patient. Studies show that many LISs have a low quality degree, and although the ISO/IEC 25010 standard defines software quality in general, so far there is no specific customization for a quality evaluation model tailored for such systems. This paper presents a case study applying a customized evaluation model - the AdEQUATE model - in order to evaluate the software quality of a LIS widely used in the State of Santa Catarina, Brazil - the LACEN system - from the perspective of its end users. Analyzing the characteristics of the LACEN system, we customized the AdEQUATE model - a model for quality evaluation of telemedicine systems based on the ISO/IEC 25010 standard through the use of a questionnaire. The questionnaire has been answered by 69 users (including physicians and biochemists), and its answers were analyzed using descriptive statistics. In general, the quality of the LACEN system has been considered as good, specifically for characteristics like effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, freedom from risk, functional suitability, and security. On the other hand, few characteristics have been considered of low quality, including performance efficiency and compatibility. Also, the collected data shows that it is feasible to use AdEQUATE's systematically derived questionnaire for detailed observations of quality degrees of the ISO/IEC 25010 standard characteristics and subcharacteristics.

[1]  A. Parasuraman,et al.  Technology Readiness Index (Tri) , 2000 .

[2]  Ben Tagger.  An Introduction and Guide to Successfully Implementing a LIMS ( Laboratory Information Management System ) , 2022 .

[3]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[4]  Liron Pantanowitz,et al.  Medical laboratory informatics. , 2007, Clinics in laboratory medicine.

[5]  Qingxiong Ma,et al.  Perceived system performance: a test of an extended technology acceptance model , 2006, DATB.

[6]  Eda Marchetti,et al.  An Experiment of Software Quality Evaluation in the Audio-Visual Media Preservation Context , 2014, 2014 9th International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology.

[7]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale , 1996 .

[8]  Z. Flegar-Meštrić,et al.  Validation of a laboratory and hospital information system in a medical laboratory accredited according to ISO 15189 , 2012, Biochemia medica.

[9]  Brian E Dixon,et al.  Electronic Health Information Quality Challenges and Interventions to Improve Public Health Surveillance Data and Practice , 2013, Public health reports.

[10]  Julie J McGowan,et al.  Electronic laboratory data quality and the value of a health information exchange to support public health reporting processes. , 2011, AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium.

[11]  Harry N. Boone,et al.  Analyzing Likert Data , 2012, Journal of Extension.

[12]  Jeff Sauro,et al.  When designing usability questionnaires, does it hurt to be positive? , 2011, CHI.

[13]  Kraig Finstad,et al.  The Usability Metric for User Experience , 2010, Interact. Comput..

[14]  Adam J. Ducey,et al.  Predicting Tablet Computer Use: An Extended Technology Acceptance Model , 2016 .

[15]  Clement Zeh,et al.  The World Health Organization African region laboratory accreditation process: improving the quality of laboratory systems in the African region. , 2010, American journal of clinical pathology.

[16]  D F Cowan,et al.  Validation of the laboratory information system. , 1998, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[17]  Aldo von Wangenheim,et al.  Building a National Telemedicine Network , 2008, IT Professional.

[18]  Aldo von Wangenheim,et al.  Identifying and Evaluating Usability Heuristics Applicable to Clinical Laboratory Systems , 2014, 2014 IEEE 27th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems.

[19]  ISO / IEC 25010 : 2011 Systems and software engineering — Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation ( SQuaRE ) — System and software quality models , 2013 .

[20]  Michael D. Reis,et al.  Types and origins of diagnostic errors in primary care settings. , 2013, JAMA internal medicine.

[21]  Fergal McCaffery,et al.  Tailoring software process capability/maturity models for the health domain , 2013 .

[22]  Chung-Feng Liu,et al.  An investigation of the effect of nurses’ technology readiness on the acceptance of mobile electronic medical record systems , 2013, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[23]  H. D. Rombach,et al.  The Goal Question Metric Approach , 1994 .

[24]  John Krogstie,et al.  Quality of Models , 2012 .

[25]  Christine Nadel,et al.  Case Study Research Design And Methods , 2016 .

[26]  José Manuel Ortega Egea,et al.  Explaining physicians' acceptance of EHCR systems: An extension of TAM with trust and risk factors , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[27]  Paul Jen-Hwa Hu,et al.  Examining a Model of Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: An Exploratory Study , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Joseph G. Sebranek,et al.  Assessment of Native Languages for Food Safety Training Programs for Meat Industry Employees , 2012, Journal of Extension.

[29]  Gari D. Clifford,et al.  Shortliffe Edward H, Cimino James J: "Biomedical Informatics; Computer Applications in Health Care and Biomedicine" , 2006 .

[30]  A. V. Wangenheim,et al.  E AdEQUATE Software Quality Evaluation Model v 1 . 0 , 2015 .

[31]  Donald S Young,et al.  The ideal laboratory information system. , 2013, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[32]  Martin McKee,et al.  Patient safety, satisfaction, and quality of hospital care: cross sectional surveys of nurses and patients in 12 countries in Europe and the United States , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.