Assessment of the Influence of Contextual Issues in Evaluating eHealth Systems Usability in Tanzania

Karisha Kavuta; Simon Msanjila; Nima Shidende

doi:10.37284/eajit.6.1.1442

Karisha Kavuta University of Dodoma
Simon Msanjila University of Dodoma
Nima Shidende University of Dodoma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37284/eajit.6.1.1442

Keywords: Usability Metrics, Contextual Issues, Ehealth Systems, Usability Evaluation

Share Article:

Abstract

The adoption of eHealth systems in healthcare facilities has rapidly increased in many countries. However, the main challenge has been the quality and level of usability of those adopted systems, and the complexity of the challenge varies from one country to another based on contextual issues. Usability is also linked to contextual issues, which have a direct impact on deciding the methods for providing services on similar systems. This research focuses on assessing the influence of contextual issues on metrics that are applicable for evaluating the usability of eHealth systems through a case study of Tanzania. The findings of this research were obtained through the quantitative method, and the analysis was performed through structural equation modelling (SEM) using AMOS and SPSS applications. It is evident from this research that contextual factors, such as user characteristics, goals and tasks, technical environment, physical environment, and resources and technology, significantly impact the usability metrics that are important to the evaluation of eHealth systems. The usability metrics for eHealth systems identified in this research include navigation visibility, accessibility, perceived ease of use, error correction, internal collaboration, information quality, external collaboration, technical quality, guide and support, and perceived benefits. This study also revealed that the usability evaluation of eHealth systems should consider both common metrics and specific metrics in order to uncover both general information system and health context-specific usability issues

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

F. Ranzani and O. Parlangeli, “Digital Technology and Usability and Ergonomics of Medical Devices,” in Textbook of Patient Safety and Clinical Risk Management [Internet]., Italy, Springer, 2020, pp. 455-464.

F. Alanezi, “Factors affecting the adoption of e-health system in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” International Health, vol. 13, p. 456–470, 2020.

ISO, “ISO-9241-11: Usability: Definitions and concepts,” ISO, Geneva, 2018.

M. Niranjanamurthy, N. Archikam, G. Himaja and P. K. Shetty, “Research Study on Importance of Usability Testing/ User Experience (UX) Testing,” International Journal of Computer Science, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 78 - 85, 2014.

M. Broekhuis, L. Velsen and H. Hermens, “Assessing usability of eHealth technology: A comparison of usability benchmarking instruments,” International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 128, pp. 24-32, 2019.

M. C. Trivedi and M. A. Khanum, “Role of context in usability evaluations: A review,” Advanced Computing: An International Journal ( ACIJ ), vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 69-78, 2012.

F. Nayebi, J.-M. Desharnais and A. Abran, “The State of the Art of Mobile Application Usability Evaluation,” in 25th IEEE Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, Montreal, 2012.

N. Bevan, J. Carter, J. Earthy, T. Geis and S. Harker, “New ISO Standards for Usability, Usability Reports and Usability Measures,” in International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Switzerland, 2016.

J. S. Mtebe and R. Nakaka, “Assessing Electronic Medical Record System Implementation at Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Center, Tanzania,” Journal of Health Informatics in Developing Countries, pp. 1-16, 2018.

T. Tiihonen, M. Vesisenaho and E. Sutinen, “Concept on Context: IS Meeting Context in Developing Countries,” in Technology for Innovation and Education in Developing Countries, 2008.

M. Maguire, “Context of Use within usability activities,” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 55, pp. 453-483, 2001.

M. Chandra and M. A. Khanum, “The role of Context in Usability Evaluation: A Review,” 2012. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.2138.pdf. [Accessed 23 February 2020].

A. Kaikkonen, T. Kallio, A. Kekäläinen, A. Kankainen and A. Cankar, “Usability Testing of Mobile Applications: A Comparison between Laboratory and Field Testing,” Journal of Usability studies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 4-16, 2005.

M. Prgomet, A. Georgiou, J. Callen and J. Westbrook, “Fit Between Individuals, Tasks, Technology, and Environment (FITTE) Framework: A Proposed Extension of FITT to Evaluate and Optimise Health Information Technology Use,” International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA), pp. 744-748, 2019.

M. Broekhuis, L. v. Velsen, L. Peute, M. Halim and H. Hermens, “Conceptualizing usability for the eHealth context: A content analysis of usability problems of eHealth applications,” Journal of Medical Internet Research (JIMR), vol. 5, no. 7, p. e18198, 2021.

H. Hyppönen, J. Kaipio, T. Heponiemi, T. Lääveri, A.-M. Aalto, J. Vänskäi and M. Elovainio, “Developing the National Usability-Focused Health Information System Scale for Physicians: Validation Study,” Journal of Internet Medical Research (JIMR), vol. 21, no. 5, p. e12875, 2019.

B. M. Byrne, Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, 2nd ed., New York: Routledge, 2013.