EHR

Designing the Optimal EMR User

Experience

Case Study on Hardware Selection and Placement

Catherine Campbell, P.Eng, M.Des Business Systems AnalystChildren’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Canada

2

Conflicts of interest

Employed by Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Information Systems Department as a Business Systems Analyst – Human Factors

Clinical Investigator, CHEO Research Institute

Implementation of the EMR is partially funded by Canada Health Infoway

CAE Professional Services – Human Factors Group

None to declare

Acknowledgements

• What devices?

• Where to put them?

• How to support patient-provider interaction?

3Image source: www.npr.org

Today’s presentation

• Implementing CHEO’s EHR: an Epic journey and how we are using human factors to help us get there.

• What is Human Factors?• Case study: collaborative prototyping• Outcomes• Lessons learned• Questions/feedback

4

5

Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario

• 167 bed tertiary care hospital; opened 1974• Academic institution, affiliated with University of Ottawa• Referral Base: ~ 2 million

• 194,000 outpatient visits to 63 specialty clinics• > 3000 medical patients admitted per year

• Regional trauma center• Level III NICU• Medical Staff >450 physicians• Medical Trainees• Nursing Staff• Allied Health

Implementing an integrated EMR at CHEO

6

Phase 3: Anesthesia, Surgery, Oncology

Phase 2: Emergency, Pharmacy, Inpatient

Phase 1: Ambulatory, Lab, Registration, Billing

Wave 1 Ambulatory Clinics

Pediatric MedicineRheumatology

Infectious DiseasesGenetics

Ear, Nose & ThroatAudiology

Physiotherapy

7

Scope and Challenges

• Switch from paper to electronic• Hospitals must purchase and

install ++ resources• Known EMR implementation

challenges:– Highlights inconsistent

practices within and between specialties

– Workflow, process and task (re)design

– System usability/complexity

– Potential increase in workload

– EMR avoidance/adoption– Privacy/Security

Image source http://cce-wakata.blogspot.fr/2014/03/

8

How do we ensure positive user experience?

• End user satisfaction with the EMR implementation begins with easy access to appropriate devices during their normal clinical activities.

• CHEO strategy: use human factors and design research methods to…– Identify and analyze current and future EMR workflows

– Identify potential workflow issues and gaps– Identify solutions that meet workflow and technical requirements

– Generate reusable guidelines for hardware selection and placement

What is Human Factors?

• The study of human behaviour, capabilities and limitations as they relate to the work environment– Physical

(Ergonomics)– Cognitive– Organizational – Cultural

• Applies to the design and evaluation of safer and more effective tools, machines, systems, tasks, jobs and environments.

9

A Human Factors Framework

10Source: A Human Factors Framework from Parush et al. 2011

Performance

Human Factors

Environmental Factors

When Human Factors are not considered

11

Using Human Factors to improve design

12

No labels required

Using Human Factors to improve design

13

Before After

Cardiopulmonary bypass machine

Baylor Healthcare System, Image source: http://www.hfes.org/web/DetailNews.aspx?ID=298

14

HF Methods & Tools Applied at CHEO

Today’s Case Study

• Three teams of Human Factors (HF) professionals working with clinic users– To study workflow

• Human-human, human-computer, human-environment interactions

– To identify requirements for selection & placement of EMR equipment

• Methods & Tools:– Observations– Task analysis– Link analysis– Participatory design development– Simulation testing

What is participatory design development?

15

Participatory / Co-design

• Engages end users early in the design process• Can be used to

– Develop common understanding of requirements in multi-disciplinary teams / design problems

– Validate requirements identified through observation, task analysis

– Generate and test design ideas quickly• Often involves

– Sketching, prototyping (building/making models) sharing and developing ideas in a group

16

Co-design how-to (brief)

• Step 1: Collect information about the tasks and environment– Observations AND interviews

• Step 2: Engage users in co-design sessions– Organized sessions 90min – 3hours ++– At the start of each session

• Introduce the problem (s) • Make sure participants know they are the experts• Provide reference materials, sketching/making supplies• Do a warm-up exercise• Make sure the session objectives are clear

– If the group is large (6+) divide into multi-disciplinary teams

– Schedule one or more “sharing” breaks– Facilitate: make sure everyone’s voice is heard, lead by example

17

Warning!Can be time/resource intensive

Can also be scaled up/down

Co-design for EMR implementation at CHEO

• Step 1: Collect information about the tasks and environment– Observations, interviews in clinic– Task analysis

• Step 2: Engage users in co-design sessions– Physician-lead education sessions– Inter-professional meetings with clinic subject matter experts

• Objectives– To confirm requirements gathered from clinic assessments (observations and task analysis outcomes)

– To get feedback on initial design ideas– To engage providers in identifying requirements and solutions for their own clinic spaces 18

19

Step 1a: Observations and interviews

• Two observers / clinic to maximize information capture– Shadow staff, observe clinic flow over 3 days

– Document workflow, roles, tasks, tools, interactions, questions

• Interviews to review workflow, ask clarifying questions

20

Step 1b: Task Analysis

• Systematic decomposition of tasks– Observed tasks + expected changes based on EMR functionality

• Analyze users, locations, artifacts, interactions, requirements– human-human, human-computer, human-environment interactions

Functions Tasks Users Location Artifacts/EquipInteraction Type PRE-

EMRRequirements

7. Initial assessment

a. Nurse conducts assessment, fills out chief complaint and past medical history section of the assessment form

Nurse, Patient/Family

Procedure room

Otolaryngology assessment form

H-H, H-A Ability to document assessment results real-time

b. Nurse places chart in the chart holder outside the room to cue the resident that Jim is ready to be seen

 Nurse Procedure room

Patient chart, chart holder

H-A Visual cue of patient ready to be seen

Functions/Tasks Interaction Analysis Requirements

21

Findings from Observations & Task Analysis

Requirement Category Description

Patient Information Elicit, document, and consolidate patient information;

Line of SightMaintain line of sight during patient/provider interaction while documenting patient information;

PrivacySecure confidential patient information from patients’ or public view.

Clinic CoordinationManage of incoming/outgoing patients , daily schedules, booking of new patients;

Shared AwarenessProvide shared clinic information to numerous people who may be co-located or distributed

22

EMR Hardware Options

Requirements

Patient Information

Line of Sight

Privacy

Clinic Coordination

Shared Awareness

Sit/Stand Combo Arm with Work surface

Sit/stand Flush wall-mounted Enclosure

Shared Desktop PC workstation

Large Flat screen wall mount (no data entry)

What about mobile?

23

Step 2a: Physician Co-Design Sessions

• All physicians (no other disciplines)• Variety of specialties• Working in different clinic spaces (physical environment)• 90minute session

– Handout requirements list, floorplans of each clinic, blank paper, pens, markers highlighters

– Introduce the hardware design problem and identified requirements - for validation

– Present possible hardware options – Present one or two clinic re-design ideas to get things going

– Engage users in discussion/sketching solutions

– Re-group for 15min group discussion at the end

24

Preliminary requirements and guiding principles…• Before seeing patient

– Providers need to know the patient is ready to be seen and where

– Providers need the ability to review patient chart, results, nursing/provider notes, etc.

…Preliminary requirements and guiding principles…• During patient visit

– Provider should be able to review chart/ enter data while maintaining line of sight to the patient.

– For hands-on encounters there is a need to facilitate quick entry of discrete data (e.g. ht, wt) and short notes for reference later

– Display screen should be able to pan 50-90deg. to show or hide from patient/parent view (show to support explanation, hide to prevent misinterpretation)

– Consider height-adjustable workstations for areas where data viewing/entry may be both quick and short as well long and detailed depending on workflow

25

…Preliminary requirements and guiding principles…• In consultation with other providers

– Shared workstations are required outside the patient room to support provider-provider (resident) consultation

– Shared workstations should be located in an area of limited foot traffic to protect patient privacy

– Screen savers and timeouts need to protect patient information while allowing providers to log in quickly

– Workstations will be configured to support most common workflow in each space

26

…Preliminary requirements and guiding principles• Closing the encounter

– Before patient leaves orders need to be printed, signed and reviewed. Printers need to be in close proximity to facilitate this

– After patient leaves the physician needs access to a workstation (in/out of exam room) to: finish documentation and close encounter, check schedule, review chart for up-coming patients

27

Potential solution for an exam room?

28

Existing setup Future concept?

29

…and then everyone started sketching, sharing, critiquing and building ideas

30

Step 2b: Interdisciplinary team meetings

• Similar outline and content to physician co-design session• Objectives:

– Validate identified requirements– Develop design solutions

• Advantages of interdisciplinary teams– Capacity to test solution ideas from multiple perspectives

– Able to covered all clinic spaces and functions

– More robust solutions

31

Outcomes

• Analysis across clinics and specialties revealed– Requirements associated with hospital-wide practices

– Similarities by visit type (regardless of specialty)

• Office visit with exam• Procedural• Counseling/therapy

• Together the task analysis and co-design led to: – REUSABLE hardware and placement recommendations that support clinic requirements by visit type

– Provided traceability for justification of hardware selection

– Proactive identification of potential workflow issues and recommendations to prepare for them

• Solutions were developed and implemented

Implemented solutions (e.g.)

32

ENT Procedure Room (Before)

33

34

ENT Procedure Rooms (After)

35

ENT Procedure Room (After)

36

Audiology Test Rooms (After)

Lessons Learned

• Engaging users in requirements and design– facilitated collaboration between clinic users sharing the same

space (e.g. different clinics using same space)– enhanced the understanding of complex workflows (e.g. Multi-

provider appointments within and across clinics)• Guiding principles led to equipment installations that supported

end user workflow• Requirements gathering and go live experience suggests that

mobile devices may better support certain fast moving, dynamic workflows but the EMR interface must be designed with this in mind.

37

User Feedback Post-Go-Live

• Touch screens worked well for nursing workflows e.g. height/weight/vitals

• Shared workstations and hall-way touch points successfully allow providers to continue workflow/check shared schedule between patients

• When it comes to configuration of equipment, consistency is important so that users know what to expect no matter where they access the EMR (e.g. printing to the nearest printer)

38

User Feedback Post-Go-Live

• Where constraints prevented implementation of solutions that met all requirements, post-go-live, users report a gap requirements are still there– Line of sight – Space constraints – existing facility design – System constraints

• Shared “heads-up” display • Mobile friendly interface design

• Application of HF methods takes expertise and resources– Initial investment to developing guiding principles through study of varied clinic workflows is allowing us to apply and iterative across waves despite reduced resources

39

Thank you

40Catherine Campbell ccampbell@cheo.on.caDr. W. James King king@cheo.on.ca

41

Suggested Reading & References

• Experience Based Co-Design http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/ebcd

• Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) Symposium on Human Factors in Healthcare www.hfes.org

• Vicente K. The human factor: revolutionizing the way people live with technology. Toronto: Knopf; 2003.

• World Health Organization. Human Factors in Patient Safety: Review of Topics and Tools. 2009