[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.206.12.79. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
1.
International Organization for Standardization. Ergonomics of human-system interaction, part 11: usability: definitions and concepts. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:en. Accessed July 22, 2019.
2.
Babbott  S, Manwell  LB, Brown  R,  et al.  Electronic medical records and physician stress in primary care: results from the MEMO Study.  J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(e1):e100-e106. doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001875PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Friedberg  MW, Chen  PG, Van Busum  KR,  et al.  Factors Affecting Physician Professional Satisfaction and Their Implications for Patient Care, Health Systems, and Health Policy. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation; 2013.
4.
Howe  JL, Adams  KT, Hettinger  AZ, Ratwani  RM.  Electronic health record usability issues and potential contribution to patient harm.  JAMA. 2018;319(12):1276-1278. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.1171PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).  2015 edition Health Information Technology (Health IT) certification criteria, 2015 edition base electronic health record (EHR) definition and ONC Health IT certification program modifications: final rule.  Fed Regist. 2015;80(200):62601-62759.PubMedGoogle Scholar
6.
Lewis  JR, Sauro  J.  Item benchmarks for the system usability scale.  J Usability Stud. 2018;13(3):158-167. http://uxpajournal.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/pdf/JUS_Lewis_May2018.pdf. Accessed October 25, 2019.Google Scholar
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Research Letter
    Health Informatics
    December 13, 2019

    Evaluating Improvements and Shortcomings in Clinician Satisfaction With Electronic Health Record Usability

    Author Affiliations
    • 1University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
    • 2MedStar Health National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, MedStar Health, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC
    JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(12):e1916651. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.16651

    With the widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs), there is increased focus on addressing the challenges of EHR usability, ie, the extent to which the technology enables users to achieve their goals effectively, efficiently, and satisfactorily.1 Poor usability is associated with clinician job dissatisfaction and burnout and could have patient safety consequences.2-4

    The US Department of Health and Human Services Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology established safety-enhanced design certification requirements for EHRs to promote usability. These requirements stipulate that vendors must conduct and report results of formal usability testing, including measuring satisfaction with the EHR system.5 Results are publicly available. While some vendors use a 5-point, ease-of-use rating scale, most vendors use the system usability scale (SUS), which is a validated posttest questionnaire that measures user satisfaction with product usability.6 The questionnaire provides a score (range, 0-100) based on a participant’s rating of 10 statements regarding a product’s usability.6 Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction with usability.6 Based on an analysis of more than 200 studies of various products in various industries, an SUS score of 68 is considered the average benchmark, and an SUS of 80 is considered the above-average benchmark.6 Recognizing the importance of satisfaction with EHR usability to clinician burnout and patient safety, reported product 2015 SUS scores for EHR systems were compared with 2014 SUS scores and with benchmarks to evaluate whether satisfaction is improving.2-4

    ×