Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2004; 43(03): 247-255
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1633865
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH

Forms that Inform[*]

R. O’Connell
1   Division of Information Services, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT, USA
,
A. Poljak
2   Division of Occupational Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
,
S. Powsner
3   Departments of Psychiatry, Surgery (Emergency Medicine), and Division of Medical Informatics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
05 February 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: Sound medical decisions are easier for clinicians who have essential patient data in the right place at the right time. Our goal was to develop a usable form to guide clinical decisions and then test it using actual cases.

Methods: The authors designed a form to represent data from patients with chest pain; it was revised several times. We incorporated opinions from clinician-users as well as evidence from the literature to improve usability. To test the design, we filled out forms with actual patient data derived from Emergency Department charts of patients who presented with chest pain. We then validated the design by having house officer reviewers make the decision to admit, observe in the ER for one day, or discharge subjects based entirely on a one-page form.

Results: Thirty-three house officers reviewed our initial design and made suggestions. Our literature search yielded a number of factors discriminating ischemic from non-ischemic chest pain. Sixteen factors were included on a finalized form in the rank order assigned by reviewing physicians. Over 4 days, data from 29 subjects were used to fill out copies of the form. Based purely on the completed forms, house officers made decisions to admit, discharge, or observe all 29 subjects in less than 30 minutes.

Conclusions: Forms have traditionally been employed to record and organize data. Here we show how principles of usability engineering can be used to create a form to meet the needs of users and even encourage evidence-based practice.

Keywords

Chest pain - hospital information systems - medical informatics - human engineering - evidence-based medicine

* Support was provided by the National Library of Medicine Training Grant #T15-LM07056, through Yale University School of Medicine.


 

  • References

  • 1 Weed LL. Medical records that guide and teach. N Engl J Med 1968; 278 (12) 652-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Weed LL. Medical records that guide and teach. N Engl J Med 1968; 278 (11) 593-600.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Fries JF. Alternatives in medical record formats. Med Care 1974; 12 (10) 871-81.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Duval C. The T System [pamphlet]. Dallas, TX: Emergency Services Consultants; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Kennedy RL, Harrison RF, Marshall SJ. Do we need computer-based decision support for the diagnosis of acute chest pain: discussion paper. J R Soc Med 1993; 86 (01) 31-4.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rubin J. Handbook of usability testing: how to plan, design, and conduct effective tests. Wiley technical communication library. New York: Wiley; 1994: 330
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Norman DA. The design of everyday things. London: Mit; 1998: 257
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Nielsen J, Levy J. Measuring Usability: preference vs. performance. Commun Assoc Comp Machinery 1994; 37: 66-75.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Chapanis A. Man-machine engineering. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Pub. Co; 1965: 134
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Tognazzini B. Tog on interface. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley; 1992: 331
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Dertouzos J. Creating the people’s computer. Technol Rev 1997; 320: 20-7.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Landaur T. The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1995
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Tenner E. Why things bite back: technology and the revenge of unintended consequences. New York: Knopf; 1996: 346
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Cartmill RS, Thornton JG. Effect of presentation of partogram information on obstetric decision-making. Lancet 1992; 339 8808 1520-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Reilly BM, Evans AT, Schaider JJ, Das K, Calvin JE, Moran LA, Roberts RR. et al. Impact of a Clinical Decision Rule on Hospital Triage of Patients with Suspected Acute Cardiac Ischemia in the Emergency Department. JAMA 2002; 288 (03) 342-50.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Nygren E, Wyatt JC, Wright P. Helping clinicians to find data and avoid delays. Lancet 1998; 352 9138 1462-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Wright P, Jansen C, Wyatt JC. How to limit clinical errors in interpretation of data. Lancet 1998; 352 9139 1539-43.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Wyatt JC, Wright P. Design should help use of patients’ data. Lancet 1998; 352 9137 1375-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Staggers N, Mills ME. Nurse-computer interaction: staff performance outcomes. Nurs Res 1994; 43 (03) 144-50.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Tufte ER. The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, Conn: Graphics Press; 1983: 197
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 1996; 312 7023 71-2.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 McCarthy BD, Wong JB, Selker HP. Detecting acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department: a review of the literature. J Gen Intern Med 1990; 5 (04) 365-73.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lee TH, Cook EF, Weisberg M, Sargent RK, Wilson C, Goldman L. Acute chest pain in the emergency room. Identification and examination of low-risk patients. Arch Intern Med 1985; 145 (01) 65-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Tierney WM, Roth B, Psaty B, McHenry R, Fitzgerald J, Stump D, Anderson FK. et al. Predictors Predictors of myocardial infarction in emergency room patients. Crit Care Med 1985; 13 (07) 526-31.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Goldman L, Cook EF, Brand DA, Lee TH, Rouan GW, Weisberg MC, Acampora D. et al. A computer protocol to predict myocardial infarction in emergency department patients with chest pain. N Engl J Med 1988; 318 (13) 797-803.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Aisaka K, Tsutsui K, Murukami Y, Ban H, Hashizume A, Oka Y, Ishikawa S. User interface design and evaluation for electronic medical record system. Medinfo 1995; 8 (01) 781-4.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Selker HP, Beshansky JR, Griffith JL, Aufderheide TP, Ballin DS, Bernard SA, Crespo SG. et al. Use of the acute cardiac ischemia time-insensitive predictive instrument (ACITIPI) to assist with triage of patients with chest pain or other symptoms suggestive of acute cardiac ischemia. A multicenter, controlled clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 1998; 129 (11) 845-55.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Pozen MW, D’Agostino RB, Selker HP, Sytkowski PA, Hood WB. et al. A predictive instrument to improve coronary-care-unit admission practices in acute ischemic heart disease. A prospective multicenter clinical trial. N Engl J Med 1984; 310 (20) 1273-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Morise AP, Haddad WJ, Beckner D. Development and validation of a clinical score to estimate estimate the probability of coronary artery disease in men and women presenting with suspected coronary disease. Am J Med 1997; 102 (04) 350-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Pearson SD, Goldman L, Garcia TB, Cook F, Lee T. Physician response to a prediction rule for the triage of emergency department patients with chest pain. J Gen Intern Med 1994; 9 (05) 241-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Fitzpatrick MA, Dodd M, Schoevers D, Tracey E. Do management algorithms improve chest pain triage?. Med J Aust 1999; 171 (08) 402-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar