Comparing two anesthesia information management system user interfaces: a usability evaluation.

Area of Science:

• Medical Informatics
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Anesthesiology

Background:

• Anesthesia Information Management Systems (AIMS) are widely used but their usability is not well understood.
• A methodology was developed to evaluate AIMS usability in a simulated clinical environment.
• A revised user interface was compared against an existing version.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the usability of a revised AIMS user interface compared to an existing one.
• To determine if the revised interface improves documentation accuracy and efficiency.
• To identify usability issues in AIMS design.

Main Methods:

• A low-fidelity simulation evaluated 20 anesthesia providers using existing and revised AIMS interfaces.
• Usability metrics included documentation accuracy, workload, satisfaction, documentation steps, user interactions, and time.
• Data were collected via session recordings, workload assessments, and satisfaction surveys.

Main Results:

• The revised AIMS interface improved documentation accuracy from 85.1% to 92.4%.
• It reduced user interactions, documentation steps, and airway documentation time.
• No significant differences were found in perceived workload or total task time.

Conclusions:

• A low-fidelity simulated environment is effective for evaluating AIMS usability.
• The revised AIMS interface demonstrated improved usability metrics.
• Continuous evaluation and revision of AIMS usability are recommended for vendors and users.