The Impact of Poor User Interfaces in Electronic Health Records

There is no doubt that electronic health records (EHRs) have made significant improvement to the healthcare industry. Whilst there has been improved efficiency, significantly improved patient care, and enhanced data management has not lived up to its promise. This is in part to due the design and usability of these systems. In our clinical experience, these systems fall short, creating significant challenges for healthcare providers. This article examines the impact of poor user interfaces in electronic health records, which are common in the legacy systems that are currently in use.

1. Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are becoming integral to modern healthcare. These systems digitise patient information and can make them accessible across different healthcare settings [1]. Despite their potential, the efficacy of EHRs is frequently undermined by poor user interface (UI) design[2].

2. The primary issues healthcare workers have experienced in our settings with EHR user interfaces include complexity, lack of intuitiveness, and poor integration with clinical workflows. These interfaces often require extensive navigation. They are cluttered with information as they lack customisation and a single system is used to cater for a variety of different users within a healthcare setting. These systems also fail to support the natural progression of clinical tasks [3]. The most frequent descriptive term we have encountered from healthcare workers for these systens is “clunky”

3. Inefficient UIs can significantly disrupt clinical workflows. Tasks that should be straightforward in healthcare settings, such as entering or retrieving patient information, become time-consuming, diverting attention from patient care. This inefficiency can lead to longer patient wait times and reduced time for direct patient interaction [4].

4. Poor UI design in EHRs can contribute to errors in data entry and interpretation. A complex or non-intuitive interface increases the risk of incorrect data input, which can have serious consequences for patient safety and treatment outcomes [5]. Additionally, the difficulty in locating and interpreting patient data can lead to misdiagnoses or inappropriate treatment plans [6].

5. User dissatisfaction is a significant consequence of poorly designed EHR interfaces. Frustration with difficult-to-use interfaces can lead to lower adoption rates among healthcare providers, undermining the potential benefits of EHR systems. The resistance to using these systems can also contribute to burnout among healthcare professionals [7].

6. To address these issues, it is important to involve a wide variety of healthcare professionals in the design and testing of EHR interfaces. This will ensure that the perspectives of all types of users are considered in the design process. User-centred design approaches that prioritise ease of use, logical information architecture, and alignment with clinical workflows can greatly enhance the functionality of EHRs. This approach will mitigate against the time and cost of regular training and support for healthcare providers which is required to deal with the challenges associated with complex interfaces [8].

Conclusion

EHRs have the potential to enhance healthcare delivery but their benefits are significantly hampered by poor UI design. By addressing the challenges of user interfaces in electronic health records, the healthcare industry can better harness the power of digital information systems to improve patient care and provider efficiency.

References:

1. Menachemi, N., & Collum, T. H. (2011). Benefits and drawbacks of electronic health record systems. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 4, 47–55.
2. Borycki, E. M., & Kushniruk, A. W. (2008). Identifying and preventing technology-induced error using simulations: Application to the design of an electronic prescribing system. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 77(10), 645–653.
3. Saleem, J. J., Russ, A. L., Justice, C. F., Hagg, H., Ebright, P. R., Woodbridge, P. A., & Doebbeling, B. N. (2009). Exploring the persistence of paper with the electronic health record. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 78(9), 618–628.
4. Ash, J. S., Berg, M., & Coiera, E. (2004). Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11(2), 104–112.
5. Koppel, R., Metlay, J. P., Cohen, A., Abaluck, B., Localio, A. R., Kimmel, S. E., & Strom, B. L. (2005). Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA, 293(10), 1197–1203.
6. Horsky, J., Zhang, J., & Patel, V. L. (2005). To err is not entirely human: Complex technology and user cognition. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 38(4), 264–266.
7. Babbott, S., Manwell, L. B., Brown, R., Montague, E., Williams, E., Schwartz, M., Linzer, M., & Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) Ambulatory Practice of the Future Task Force (2014). Electronic medical records and physician stress in primary care: Results from the MEMO Study. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 21(e1), e100-e106.
8. Johnson, C. M., Johnson, T. R., & Zhang, J. (2005). A user-centered framework for redesigning health care interfaces. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 38(1), 75–87.