Focus points

To understand what should be changed in the design, the focus goes back to the concerns to understand to what extent the concerns are issues. To what extent the requirements have been met, will be discussed after the last design iteration in the chapter 12.

1. Does the user understand how to create a new report?

Only one participant did not understand how to create a new report. After showing it to him, no problems ocurred. It can therefore be stated that creating a new report is not an issue.

2. Does the user understand how to filter reports?

Although this went also fine in most of the cases (only one participant did not understand what the icon meant), four participants first clicked on the magnifier before they selected the filter icon. This raises the question why there are two filter functionalities (a search button to search for text and a filter button to filter the reports on authors or labels) and whether these should be separated or not. Furthermore, more feedback is needed, because some participants had some doubts about whether they had filtered the reports or not. They needed to click again on the icon to check this.

3. Does the user understand when a report has a notification?

In general this was not clear. Although 8 participants saw the exclamation mark, only 4 of them selected it. The main reason was that people thought it only meant that the report is important, it was not clear that one could click on the icon, or that it could contain a message.

4. Does the user understand what the icons connected to the possible actions mean? The participants did not mention that they did not understand the icons, but 7 participants first tried all three icons before they knew how to create a task. This indicates that the icons are not very clear in their meaning. This does not automatically mean that the signs themselves are not clear, it might also be caused by the size or colour use of the icons.

5. Does the user understand what reports are new?

Seven participants had no problem with understanding which reports are new, 6. Does the user know what the button ‘Dossier’ means?

Since 5 participants did not select the button by themselves, it is concluded that this button is not clear. This might not be caused mainly by the text, but also by the placement of the button (see figure 11.3). Two participants tried to click on the word ‘care-plan’ at the top of the left information box, this might for example also be a solution.

Figure 11.3: The button of the ‘Dossier’ is placed at the bottom of the information box, a little separated from the goals of the care plan.

7. Is it clear that one first needs to save a report before he can create follow-up actions? Although everyone saved the report before creating a follow-up action, there was a lot of doubt.

8. Is the text for the follow-up actions clear?

No problems or doubts have been found in this step, so the text is clear.

9. Is it clear to the user what happens if a care provider is temporarily not available? The participants often did not recognize the care provider to be absent. The participants had not seen it. One participant even thought that the name of the care provider was coloured grey to function as a hint that she had to select that particular name in the test. The participants who saw that she was not available had no trouble with selecting the locum.

10. Does this interface contribute to the communication between the user and other care providers?

Although it is very important in this research, it is not feasible to provide a satisfying answer to this question. As described before, this is something that cannot be tested by use of a usability test. The participants have therefore been asked to what they expect. The possibility to send messages after creating a report is appreciated by most of the participants and they felt that this is safer and provides a better overview than their current EHR.

11. Does the interface add value to the user?

All participants indicated that the new interface has an added value as compared to their current EHR. It should be taken into account that the current interfaces of the participants differ in func- tionality.

Other focus points

The participants were asked to create their own task and state what they thought of it compared to their current system. When creating their own tasks, it turned out that two participants wanted to add a goal/episode. Furthermore, two participants wanted to add a certain indicator of im- portance. One participant wanted to know when the last evaluation has been done, another par- ticipant wanted to see only the reports without a goal linked. These last two are both search functionalities.

One ECP wondered how she would be able to write a report in both an episode and a goal. This is connected to ‘efficiency in text input’ (chapter 9.2), which should be investigated further. Two participants would like to see the disciplines next to the names of the care providers. One participant (ECP) wanted to work with another registration type and two participants thought that there were too many icons, although they expected that they would get used to it. Also, two participants thought that there is not enough colour and contrast in the interface, but this is out of the scope of the prototype. Finally, one nurse indicated that after a ward round of the ECP she has to report under several goals. She therefore suggested to create an extra button ‘ward round’ in which she could place these reports.