Volume 25, Issue 3 (12-2022)
jha 2022, 25(3): 87-107 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Naseri S, saremi M, Namdari M, Pouyakian M. Usability of the integrated health system (SIB) among public health and midwifery users. jha 2022; 25 (3) :87-107
URL: http://jha.iums.ac.ir/article-1-4190-en.html
URL: http://jha.iums.ac.ir/article-1-4190-en.html
1- MSc, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
2- Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran ,saremim@yahoo.com
3- Assisstant Professor, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
4- Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
2- Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran ,
3- Assisstant Professor, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
4- Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
Abstract: (1573 Views)
Introduction: Integrated health system (SIB) is a common electronic health records, widely used in Iranian healthcare centers. The present study aimed to investigate the usability of this system among selected users.
Methods: A descriptive-analytical study was designed and conducted in 2021 with participation of 196 healthcare workers. Usability of the system was tested by means of the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the IsoMetric Standard Questionnaire. Data analysis was applied using SPSS version 26 software.
Results: SUS showed a marginal usability for the system. All the 7 dimensions of the isometric questionnaire were found to be within the relatively favorable range with an average score of 3.1 to 3.2. SIB system was unacceptable for 30.6% of users, marginaly acceptable for 45.4%, and acceptable for 23.9% of users. Results showed a significant but inverse relationship between usability of the system with the average time past on it during a working day (p<0.039). Women estimated this system as more usable compared to men (p = 0.007).
Conclusion: The present study emphasized that SIB system needs specific considerations to become more usabile, and compatible with ergonomic dialogue principles. The most effective modifications would be included eliminating complicated steps, harmonizing relevant process, reducing memory-based process, individualization, error tolerancy, and user-centered design.
Methods: A descriptive-analytical study was designed and conducted in 2021 with participation of 196 healthcare workers. Usability of the system was tested by means of the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the IsoMetric Standard Questionnaire. Data analysis was applied using SPSS version 26 software.
Results: SUS showed a marginal usability for the system. All the 7 dimensions of the isometric questionnaire were found to be within the relatively favorable range with an average score of 3.1 to 3.2. SIB system was unacceptable for 30.6% of users, marginaly acceptable for 45.4%, and acceptable for 23.9% of users. Results showed a significant but inverse relationship between usability of the system with the average time past on it during a working day (p<0.039). Women estimated this system as more usable compared to men (p = 0.007).
Conclusion: The present study emphasized that SIB system needs specific considerations to become more usabile, and compatible with ergonomic dialogue principles. The most effective modifications would be included eliminating complicated steps, harmonizing relevant process, reducing memory-based process, individualization, error tolerancy, and user-centered design.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Health Information Management
Received: 2022/06/26 | Accepted: 2022/09/20 | Published: 2023/03/12
Received: 2022/06/26 | Accepted: 2022/09/20 | Published: 2023/03/12
References
1. Ahmadi M, Rezaei Hachesoo P, Shahmoradi L. Electronic health record: Structure, content, and evaluation. Tehran: Jafari; 2008. [In Persian]
2. Birkhead GS, Klompas M, Shah NR. Uses of electronic health records for public health surveillance to advance public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2015;36:345-59. [DOI:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122747]
3. Thakkar M, Davis DC. Risks, barriers, and benefits of EHR systems: A comparative study based on size of hospital. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2006;3:1-19. [DOI:10.4018/jhisi.2006100105]
4. Kabir MJ, Ashrafian Amiri H, Rabiee M, Keshavarzi A, Hosseini S, Nasrollahpour Shirvani D. Satisfaction of urban family physicians and health care providers in Fars and Mazandaran provinces from integrated health system. Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics. 2018;4(4):244-52. [In Persian]
5. Hamborg K-C, Vehse B, Bludau H-B. Questionnaire based usability evaluation of hospital information systems. Electronic journal of information systems evaluation. 2004;7(1):21-30.
6. Lowry SZ, Quinn MT, Ramaiah M, Schumacher RM, Patterson ES, North R, et al. Technical evaluation, testing, and validatiaon of the usability of electronic health records. United State: Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2012. 163 p. Report No. NISTIR 7804. [DOI:10.6028/NIST.IR.7804]
7. Carayon P, Hoonakker P. Human factors and usability for health information technology: Old and new challenges. Yearb Med Inform. 2019;28(1):71-7. [DOI:10.1055/s-0039-1677907]
8. Haoues M, Sellami A, Ben-Abdallah H, Cheikhi L. A guideline for software architecture selection based on ISO 25010 quality related characteristics. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management. 2017;8:886-909. [DOI:10.1007/s13198-016-0546-8]
9. Rangraz Jeddi F, Nabovati E, Bigham R, Khajouei R. Usability evaluation of a comprehensive national health information system: Relationship of quality components to users' characteristics. Int J Med Inform. 2020;133:1-23. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104026]
10. Ministry of Health and Medical Education. The set of guidelines for the health system transformation program. Deputy of treatment. 2021:1-74. [In Persian]
11. Iranian General Physicians Association. Apple system usability test report [Internet]. Iranian General Physicians Association; 2017. 168 P. Available from: https://isgp.ir/6831/%DA%AF%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B4-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA-%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%BE%D8%B0%DB%8C%D8%B1%DB%8C-%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%87-%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%A8-%D9%84%DB%8C%D9%86/ [In Persian]
12. Brooke J. SUS: A retrospective. J Usability Stud. 2013;8(2):29-40.
13. Devy NPIR, Wibirama S, Santosa PI, editors. Evaluating user experience of english learning interface using user experience questionnaire and system usability scale. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS). 2017 Nov 15-16; Semarang, Indonesia. IEEE;2018. [DOI:10.1109/ICICOS.2017.8276345]
14. Taheri F, Kavusi A, Faghihnia Torshozi Y, Farshad AA, Saremi M. Assessment of validity and reliability of Persian version of system usability scale (SUS) for traffic signs. Iran Occupational Health. 2017;14(1):12-22. [In Persian]
15. Gediga G, Hamborg K-C, Duntsch I. The IsoMetrics usability inventory: An operationalization of ISO 9241-10 supporting summative and formative evaluation of software systems. Behav Inf Technol. 1999;18(3):151-64. [DOI:10.1080/014492999119057]
16. Bevan N. International standards for HCI and usability. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2001;55(4):533-52. [DOI:10.1006/ijhc.2001.0483]
17. Safdari R, Dargahi H, Shahmoradi L, Farzaneh Nejad A. Comparing four softwares based on ISO 9241 part 10. J Med Syst. 2012;36(5):2787-93. [DOI:10.1007/s10916-011-9755-5]
18. Mortezaei S, Mohammadnejad E. Usability evaluation of a military medical center's hospital information system based on ISO 9241. Journal of Police Medicine. 2022;11(1):1-14. [In Persian]
19. Alipour J, Hoseini Teshnizi S, Hayavi Haghighi MH, Feghhi Z, Sharifi R, Kohkan A. Perspectives on hospital information system in medical practice. Hormozgan medical journal. 2010;14(2):140-7. [In Persian]
20. Ahmadi M, Shahmoradi L, Barabadi M, Hoseini F. A survey of usability of hospital information systems from the perspective of nurses, department secretaries, and paraclinic users in selected hospitals: 2009. Journal of Health Administration. 2011;14(44):11-20. [In Persian]
21. Sheikhtaheri A, Ghazizadeh Z. Usability evaluation of the farabar statistical information system in Iranian Universities of Medical Sciences. Journal of Health Administration. 2018;21(71):37-49. [In Persian]
22. Edwards PJ, Moloney KP, Jacko JA, Sainfort F. Evaluating usability of a commercial electronic health record: A case study. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2008;66(10):718-28. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.06.002]
23. Bloom BM, Pott J, Thomas S, Gaunt DR, Hughes TC. Usability of electronic health record systems in UK EDs. Emerg Med J. 2021;38(6):410-5. [DOI:10.1136/emermed-2020-210401]
24. Warid MNM, Supriyanto E, Yahya A, Bah MNM, Fang NC. Online framework for thalassemia medical record management system. AIP Conference Proceedings. 2019;2092(1):1-8. [DOI:10.1063/1.5096740]
25. Mohammadi Abnavi M, Saeed S. Evaluating the performance of the integrated health system in the quality of health care delivery from the viewpoint of health workers and health care providers throughout iran in 2020. Journal of Health and Biomedical Informatics. 2021;8(2):184-92. [In Persian]
26. Moghaddasi H, Dehghani M, Emami H, Asadi F. Evaluation of the integrated health system (SIB) based on the users' point of view regarding the application, purposes and features. Health Information Management. 2022;19(2):54-9. [In Persian]
27. Marcilly R, Schiro J, Heyndels L, Guerlinger S, Pigot A, Pelayo S. Competitive usability evaluation of electronic health records: Preliminary results of a case study. In: Mantas J, Stoicu-Tivadar L, Chronaki C, Hasman A, Weber P, Gallos P, et al, editors. Public Health and Informatics. Netherlands: IOS Press; 2021. p. 834-8. [DOI:10.3233/SHTI210296]
28. Mahmoudi Maymand M, Yaghoobi T, Naghdi sede P. Comparing the laboratory module of hospital information system software in hospitals of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, based on the international standard ISO 9241-110. Health Information Management. 2015;12(3):287-97. [In Persian]
29. Safdari R, Dargahi H, Shahmoradi L. Survey of quality ergonomic of Iran's hospital information system and comparison with three other software from users' point of view. Journal of Hospital. 2010;9(1):33-42. [In Persian]
30. Ahmadi M, Shahmoradi L, Barabadi M, Hoseini F. Usability evaluation of hospital information systems based on IsoMetric 9241. Hakim Research Journal. 2011;13(4):226-33. [In Persian]
31. Khajouei R, Azizi AA, Atashi A. Usability evaluation of an emergency information system: A heuristic evaluation. Journal of Health Administration. 2013;16(52):61-72. [In Persian]
32. Okhovati M, Karami F, Khajouei R. Sability ranking of central libraries' websites of Iranian medical universities and its relationship with webometric ranking. Journal of Health Administration. 2015;18(61):17-30. [In Persian]
33. Ahmadian L, Salehi F, Abedinzadeh A, Khatibi F. Usability evaluation of a radiology information system. Journal of Health Administration. 2017;20(69):67-78. [In Persian]
34. Alinejhad A, Nourani A, Jebraeily M. Usability evaluation of the user interface in electronic prescribing systems of Iran health insurance organization and social security organization. Journal of Health Administration. 2022;25(2):78-94. [In Persian]
35. Khairat S, Coleman C, Ottmar P, Bice T, Koppel R, Carson SS. Physicians gender and their use of electronic health records: Findings from a mixed-methods usability study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019;26(12):1505-14. [DOI:10.1093/jamia/ocz126]
36. Dianat I, Adeli P, Asgari Jafarabadi M, Karimi MA. User-centred web design, usability and user satisfaction: The case of online banking websites in Iran. Appl Ergon. 2019;81:1-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102892]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Site Keywords
Health, Administration, Scientific Article, Iran University of Medical Sciences,
