Human-Centered Design Study: Enhancing the Usability of a Mobile Phone App in an Integrated Falls Risk Detection System for Use by Older Adult Users

Background Design processes such as human-centered design (HCD), which involve the end user throughout the product development and testing process, can be crucial in ensuring that the product meets the needs and capabilities of the user, particularly in terms of safety and user experience. The structured and iterative nature of HCD can often conflict with the necessary rapid product development life-cycles associated with the competitive connected health industry. Objective The aim of this study was to apply a structured HCD methodology to the development of a smartphone app that was to be used within a connected health fall risk detection system. Our methodology utilizes so called discount usability engineering techniques to minimize the burden on resources during development and maintain a rapid pace of development. This study will provide prospective designers a detailed description of the application of a HCD methodology. Methods A 3-phase methodology was applied. In the first phase, a descriptive “use case” was developed by the system designers and analyzed by both expert stakeholders and end users. The use case described the use of the app and how various actors would interact with it and in what context. A working app prototype and a user manual were then developed based on this feedback and were subjected to a rigorous usability inspection. Further changes were made both to the interface and support documentation. The now advanced prototype was exposed to user testing by end users where further design recommendations were made. Results With combined expert and end-user analysis of a comprehensive use case having originally identified 21 problems with the system interface, we have only seen and observed 3 of these problems in user testing, implying that 18 problems were eliminated between phase 1 and 3. Satisfactory ratings were obtained during validation testing by both experts and end users, and final testing by users shows the system requires low mental, physical, and temporal demands according to the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX). Conclusions From our observation of older adults’ interactions with smartphone interfaces, there were some recurring themes. Clear and relevant feedback as the user attempts to complete a task is critical. Feedback should include pop-ups, sound tones, color or texture changes, or icon changes to indicate that a function has been completed successfully, such as for the connection sequence. For text feedback, clear and unambiguous language should be used so as not to create anxiety, particularly when it comes to saving data. Warning tones or symbols, such as caution symbols or shrill tones, should only be used if absolutely necessary. Our HCD methodology, designed and implemented based on the principles of the International Standard Organizaton (ISO) 9241-210 standard, produced a functional app interface within a short production cycle, which is now suitable for use by older adults in long term clinical trials.

[1]  Milena M. Head,et al.  The impact of age on website usability , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[2]  Gunilla Haegerstrom-Portnoy,et al.  Comparison of Panel D-15 Tests in a Large Older Population , 2014, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[3]  Andrew Sears,et al.  Human-Computer Interaction: Development Process , 2009 .

[4]  N. Charness,et al.  Designing for Older Adults , 2014 .

[5]  Leo R. Quinlan,et al.  Human Centred Design Considerations for Connected Health Devices for the Older Adult , 2014, Journal of personalized medicine.

[6]  Jeff Sauro,et al.  The Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale , 2009, HCI.

[7]  A Kushniruk,et al.  Usability Methods for Ensuring Health Information Technology Safety: Evidence-Based Approaches Contribution of the IMIA Working Group Health Informatics for Patient Safety , 2013, Yearbook of Medical Informatics.

[8]  F. Sofi,et al.  Physical activity and risk of cognitive decline: a meta‐analysis of prospective studies , 2011, Journal of internal medicine.

[9]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Use and Design of Handheld Computers for Older Adults: A Review and Appraisal , 2012, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  Liana M. Kiff,et al.  Touch Screen User Interfaces for Older Adults: Button Size and Spacing , 2007, HCI.

[11]  C. Polman,et al.  Low-contrast acuity measures visual improvement in phase 3 trial of natalizumab in relapsing MS , 2012, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[12]  Oliver Findl,et al.  Meta‐analysis of accommodating intraocular lenses , 2007, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[13]  R. Khajouei,et al.  Classification and prioritization of usability problems using an augmented classification scheme , 2011, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[14]  Luc P de Witte,et al.  User-centered development and testing of a monitoring system that provides feedback regarding physical functioning to elderly people , 2013, Patient preference and adherence.

[15]  K. Echt,et al.  Predictors of Reported Internet Use in Older Adults with High and Low Health Literacy: The Role of Socio-Demographics and Visual and Cognitive Function , 2011 .

[16]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[17]  James R. Lewis,et al.  Psychometric evaluation of an after-scenario questionnaire for computer usability studies: the ASQ , 1991, SGCH.

[18]  Klaus P. Ebmeier,et al.  Timing of onset of cognitive decline: results from Whitehall II prospective cohort study , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[19]  Ian Robinson,et al.  Developing medical device technologies from users' perspectives: A theoretical framework for involving users in the development process , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[20]  A. Berztiss,et al.  Requirements Engineering , 2002, J. Object Technol..

[21]  Maureen G Maguire,et al.  One eye or two: a comparison of binocular and monocular low-contrast acuity testing in multiple sclerosis. , 2011, American journal of ophthalmology.

[22]  Curtis B. Irwin,et al.  Effect of Touch Screen Button Size and Spacing on Touch Characteristics of Users With and Without Disabilities , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[23]  James T. Miller,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[24]  Alejandro Rodríguez-Molinero,et al.  A Human-Centered Design Methodology to Enhance the Usability, Human Factors, and User Experience of Connected Health Systems: A Three-Phase Methodology , 2017, JMIR human factors.

[25]  Osama Alfarraj,et al.  Issues to Consider in Designing Health Care Information Systems: A User-centred Design Approach , 2015 .

[26]  Mirams Ruth,et al.  Human-Centred Design , 2014 .

[27]  Isabel de la Torre Díez,et al.  Development and Evaluation of Tools for Measuring the Quality of Experience (QoE) in mHealth Applications , 2013, Journal of Medical Systems.

[28]  K. Thayaparan,et al.  Clinical assessment of two new contrast sensitivity charts , 2006, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[29]  Lynne Cooke,et al.  Assessing Concurrent Think-Aloud Protocol as a Usability Test Method: A Technical Communication Approach , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[30]  C. Bundesen,et al.  A neural theory of visual attention and short-term memory (NTVA) , 2011, Neuropsychologia.