Consumers' Needs for Laboratory Results Portals: Questionnaire Study.
barrier
clinical laboratory information systems
consumer health information
facilitator
information system
laboratory result
laboratory test result
patient portal
questionnaire
usability
user-centered design
Journal
JMIR human factors
ISSN: 2292-9495
Titre abrégé: JMIR Hum Factors
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101666561
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Jun 2023
12 Jun 2023
Historique:
received:
20
09
2022
accepted:
13
04
2023
revised:
25
03
2023
medline:
12
6
2023
pubmed:
12
6
2023
entrez:
12
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Over the last decade, there has been an increase in the number of health care consumers (ie, patients, citizens, and laypeople) with access to their laboratory results through portals. However, many portals are not designed with the consumer in mind, which can limit communication effectiveness and consumer empowerment. We aimed to study design facilitators and barriers affecting consumer use of a laboratory results portal. We sought to identify modifiable design attributes to inform future interface specifications and improve patient safety. A web-based questionnaire with open- and closed-ended items was distributed to consumers in British Columbia, Canada. Open-ended items with affinity diagramming and closed-ended questions with descriptive statistics were analyzed. Participants (N=30) preferred reviewing their laboratory results through portals rather than waiting to see their provider. However, respondents were critical of the interface design (ie, interface usability, information completeness, and display clarity). Scores suggest there are display issues impacting communication that require urgent attention. There are modifiable usability, content, and display issues associated with laboratory results portals that, if addressed, could arguably improve communication effectiveness, patient empowerment, and health care safety.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Over the last decade, there has been an increase in the number of health care consumers (ie, patients, citizens, and laypeople) with access to their laboratory results through portals. However, many portals are not designed with the consumer in mind, which can limit communication effectiveness and consumer empowerment.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to study design facilitators and barriers affecting consumer use of a laboratory results portal. We sought to identify modifiable design attributes to inform future interface specifications and improve patient safety.
METHODS
METHODS
A web-based questionnaire with open- and closed-ended items was distributed to consumers in British Columbia, Canada. Open-ended items with affinity diagramming and closed-ended questions with descriptive statistics were analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Participants (N=30) preferred reviewing their laboratory results through portals rather than waiting to see their provider. However, respondents were critical of the interface design (ie, interface usability, information completeness, and display clarity). Scores suggest there are display issues impacting communication that require urgent attention.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There are modifiable usability, content, and display issues associated with laboratory results portals that, if addressed, could arguably improve communication effectiveness, patient empowerment, and health care safety.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37307049
pii: v10i1e42843
doi: 10.2196/42843
pmc: PMC10337333
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e42843Informations de copyright
©Helen Monkman, Janessa Griffith, Leah MacDonald, Blake Lesselroth. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (https://humanfactors.jmir.org), 12.06.2023.
Références
Ann Clin Biochem. 2016 Nov;53(6):669-679
pubmed: 27013742
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Apr 1;25(4):440-446
pubmed: 29240899
Work. 2012;41 Suppl 1:328-32
pubmed: 22316744
Health Lit Res Pract. 2020 Nov 6;4(4):e224-e229
pubmed: 33170288
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88
pubmed: 16204405
Patient Educ Couns. 2021 Jan;104(1):118-129
pubmed: 32798080
J Biomed Inform. 2017 Mar;67:69-79
pubmed: 28088527
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Aug 21;264:1403-1407
pubmed: 31438157
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 May 01;24(3):520-528
pubmed: 28040686
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 23;11(6):e0154743
pubmed: 27337092
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019;257:484-488
pubmed: 30741244
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018 Feb 12;18(1):11
pubmed: 29433495
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022 May 25;294:599-603
pubmed: 35612159
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019 Feb 25;57(3):371-374
pubmed: 30724547
Int J Med Inform. 2015 Feb;84(2):111-8
pubmed: 25453275
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Dec 7;22(12):e18725
pubmed: 33284117
Digit Health. 2020 Aug 30;6:2055207620948996
pubmed: 32944269
Int J Med Inform. 2002 Dec 18;68(1-3):113-27
pubmed: 12467796
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Aug 04;17(8):e191
pubmed: 26242801
Harv Bus Rev. 2003 Dec;81(12):46-54, 124
pubmed: 14712543
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022 Jun 6;290:867-871
pubmed: 35673142
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 Dec 13;10:2501-2517
pubmed: 28008236