Application of human factors to improve usability of clinical decision support for diagnostic decision-making: a scenario-based simulation study. Issue 4 (27th November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Carayon, Pascale; Hoonakker, Peter; Hundt, Ann Schoofs; Salwei, Megan; Wiegmann, Douglas; Brown, Roger L; Kleinschmidt, Peter; Novak, Clair; Pulia, Michael; Wang, Yudi; Wirkus, Emily; Patterson, Brian
• Is Part Of: BMJ quality & safety. Volume 29:Issue 4(2020)
• Page Start: 329
• Page End: 340
• Publication Date: 2019-11-27
• Subjects: diagnostic errors -- human factors -- decision support, clinical -- emergency department -- decision making; Medical care -- Quality control -- Periodicals; Health facilities -- Risk management -- Periodicals; Medical errors -- Prevention -- Periodicals; 362.106805
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009857
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-5415

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: In this study, we used human factors (HF) methods and principles to design a clinical decision support (CDS) that provides cognitive support to the pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnostic decision-making process in the emergency department. We hypothesised that the application of HF methods and principles will produce a more usable CDS that improves PE diagnostic decision-making, in particular decision about appropriate clinical pathway. Materials and methods: We conducted a scenario-based simulation study to compare a HF-based CDS (the so-called CDS for PE diagnosis (PE-Dx CDS)) with a web-based CDS (MDCalc); 32 emergency physicians performed various tasks using both CDS. PE-Dx integrated HF design principles such as automating information acquisition and analysis, and minimising workload. We assessed all three dimensions of usability using both objective and subjective measures: effectiveness (eg, appropriate decision regarding the PE diagnostic pathway), efficiency (eg, time spent, perceived workload) and satisfaction (perceived usability of CDS). Results: Emergency physicians made more appropriate diagnostic decisions (94% with PE-Dx; 84% with web-based CDS; p<0.01) and performed experimental tasks faster with the PE-Dx CDS (on average 96 s per scenario with PE-Dx; 117 s with web-based CDS; p<0.001). They also reported lower workload (p<0.001) and higher satisfaction (p<0.001) with PE-Dx. Conclusions: This simulation study shows that HF methods and principles can improve usability of CDS and diagnostic decision-making. Aspects of the HF-based CDS that provided cognitive support to emergency physicians and improved diagnostic performance included automation of information acquisition (eg, auto-populating risk scoring algorithms), minimisation of workload and support of decision selection (eg, recommending a clinical pathway). These HF design principles can be applied to the design of other CDS technologies to improve diagnostic safety.