Skip to main content

An Analytical Approach for Predicting and Identifying Use Error and Usability Problem

  • Conference paper
HCI and Usability for Medicine and Health Care (USAB 2007)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 4799))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In health care, the use of technical equipment plays a central part. To achieve high patient safety and efficient use, it is important to avoid use errors and usability problems when handling the medical equipment. This can be achieved by performing different types of usability evaluations on prototypes during the product development process of medical equipment. This paper describes an analytical approach for predicting and identifying use error and usability problems. The approach consists of four phases; (1) Definition of Evaluation, (2) System Description, (3) Interaction Analysis, and (4) Result Compilation and Reflection. The approach is based on the methods Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA), Enhanced Cognitive Walkthrough (ECW) and Predictive Use Error Analysis (PUEA).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basnyat, A., Palanque, P.: Softaware hazard and barriers for informing the design of safety-critical interactive systems. In: Zio, G.S. (ed.) Safety and Reliability for Managing Risk, pp. 257–265. Taylor & Francis Group, London (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bligård, L.-O.: Prediction of Medical Device Usability Problems and Use Errors – An Improved Analytical Methodical Approach, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bligård, L.-O., Eriksson, M., Osvalder, A.-L.: Internal Report Gambro Lundia AB, Classified (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bligård, L.-O., Osvalder, A.-L.: Internal Report Gambro Lundia AB, Classified (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cooper, L., Baber, C.: Focus Groups. In: Stanton, N.A., Hedge, A., Brookhuis, K., Salas, E., Hendrick, H. (eds.) Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods, CRC Press, London (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Crowley, J.J., Kaye, R.D.: Identifying and understanding medical device use errors. Journal of Clinical Engineering 27, 188–193 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Embrey, D.E.: SHERPA: a Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach, International Topical Meeting on Advances in human factors in nuclear power system, American Nuclear Society, Knoxville, pp. 184–193 (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Embrey, D.E., Reason, J.T.: The Application of Cognitive Models to the Evaluation and Prediction of Human Reability, International Topical Meeting on Advances in human factors in nuclear power system, American Nuclear Society, Knoxville (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  9. FDA, Proposal for Reporting of Use Errors with Medical Devices (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Garmer, K., Liljegren, E., Osvalder, A.-L., Dahlman, S.: Application of usability testing to the development of medical equipment. Usability testing of a frequently used infusion pump and a new user interface for an infusion pump developed with a human factors approach, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 29, 145–159 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Garmer, K., Ylvén, J., Karlsson, I.C.M.: User participation in requirements elicitation comparing focus group interviews and usability tests for eliciting usability requirements for medical equipment: A case study. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 33, 85–98 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Graham, M.J., Kubose, T.K., Jordan, D., Zhang, J., Johnson, T.R., Patel, V.L.: Heuristic evaluation of infusion pumps: Implications for patient safety in Intensive Care Units. International Journal of Medical Informatics 73, 771–779 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Harms-Ringdahl, L.: Safety Analysis - Principles and Practice in Occupational Safety. Taylor & Francis, London (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Harris, D., Stanton, N.A., Marshall, A., Young, M.S., Demagalski, J., Salmon, P.: Using SHERPA to predict design-induced error on the flight deck. Aerospace Science and Technology 9, 525–532 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hartson, H.R., Andre, T.S., Williges, R.C.: Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 13, 373–410 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Holzinger, A.: Usability engineering methods for software developers. Communications of the ACM 48, 71–74 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. IEC, IEC 60601-1-6:2004 Medical electrical equipment - Part 1-6: General requirements for safety - Collateral standard: Usability IEC, Geneva (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Janhager, J.: User Consideration in Early Stages of Product Development – Theories and Methods, The Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kaufman, D.R., Patel, V.L., Hilliman, C., Morin, P.C., Pevzner, J., Weinstock, R.S., Goland, R., Shea, S., Starren, J.: Usability in the real world: assessing medical information technologies in patients’ homes. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 36, 45–60 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kushniruk, A.W., Patel, V.L.: Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 37, 56–76 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lane, R., Stanton, N.A., Harrison, D.: Applying hierarchical task analysis to medication administration errors. Applied Ergonomics 37, 669–679 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lewis, C., Wharton, C.: Cognitive Walkthrough. In: Helander, M., Landauer, T.K., Prabhu, P. (eds.) Handbook of Human-computer Interaction, Elsevier Science BV, New York (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Liljegren, E., Osvalder, A.-L.: Cognitive engineering methods as usability evaluation tools for medical equipment. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 34, 49–62 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lin, L., Isla, R., Doniz, K., Harkness, H., Vicente, K.J., Doyle, D.J.: Applying human factors to the design of medical equipment: Patient-controlled analgesia. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 14, 253–263 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu, Y., Osvalder, A.-L., Dahlman, S.: Exploring user background settings in cognitive walkthrough evaluation of medical prototype interfaces: A case study. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35, 379–390 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Moric, A., Bligård, L.-O., Osvalder, A.-L.: Usability of Reusable SpO2 Sensors: A Comparison between two Sensor Types. In: NES. 36th Annual Congress of the Nordic Ergonomics Society Conference, Kolding, Denmark (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nielsen, J.: Usability engineering. Academic Press, Boston (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Nielsen, J., Mack, R.L. (eds.): Usability inspection methods. Wiley, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Obradovich, J.H., Woods, D.D.: Users as designers: How people cope with poor HCI design in computer-based medical devices. Human Factors 38, 574–592 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rasmussen, J.: Skills, rules and knowledge; signals, signs and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics SMC-13, 257–266 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Reason, J.: Human error. Cambridge Univ. Press, cop., Cambridge (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reason, J.: Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents, Ashgate, Aldershot (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sanders, M.S., McCormick, E.J.: Human Factors in Engineering and Design. McGraw-Hill, New York (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Stanton, N.A.: Hierarchical task analysis: Developments, applications, and extensions. Applied Ergonomics 37, 55–79 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wharton, C., Rieman, J., Lewis, C., Polson, P.G.: The Cognitive Walkthrough Method: A Practitioner’s Guide. In: Nielsen, J., Mack, R.L. (eds.) Usability Inspection Methods, John Wiley And Sons Ltd, New York, UK (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Woods, D., Cook, R.I.: The New Look at Error, Safety, and Failure: A Primer for Health Care (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Zhang, J., Johnson, T.R., Patel, V.L., Paige, D.L., Kubose, T.: Using usability heuristics to evaluate patient safety of medical devices. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 36, 23–30 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang, J., Patel, V.L., Johnson, T.R., Shortliffe, E.H.: A cognitive taxonomy of medical errors. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 37, 193–204 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Andreas Holzinger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bligård, LO., Osvalder, AL. (2007). An Analytical Approach for Predicting and Identifying Use Error and Usability Problem. In: Holzinger, A. (eds) HCI and Usability for Medicine and Health Care. USAB 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4799. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76805-0_38

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76805-0_38

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-76804-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-76805-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics