Usability Evaluation of the Electronic Medical Record of the Rapid Response Team: a Case Study

Document Type : Case Study


1 School of Management & Information Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

2 Anesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

3 Student Research Committee, Department Health Information Technology, and Management, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

4 Information Management, Department of knowledge and information science, Tarbiat Modares University (TMU), Tehran, Iran.

5 Department of Health Information Technology and Management, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.


Aim: This study was conducted to determine the usability of the rapid response team (RRT) electronic medical records (EMRs) system at an Abu-Ali-Sina organ transplant hospital, Shiraz, Iran.
Method: This cross-sectional study was carried out in partnership with 25 direct members of RRT includes nurses and anesthesia technicians who were on the shift during the data collection for two months. To evaluate, the Questionnaire for User Interaction Satisfaction (QUIS) version 7 was used. Data were analyzed by SPSS version 19.
Results: A total of 20 out of 25 questionnaires were obtained. Seven (25.0 %) of 27 sections were higher than seven, and all areas were higher than five. The highest rankings were for 1) reading characters on the computer screen 2) highlighting on the screen simplify task 3) overall reactions: wonderful and learning to operate the system.
Conclusion: This study demonstrates the usability of the hospital RRT for the EMRs system and over the moderate. However, the flexibility and capability of the rapid response for EMRs tool require to be improved.


  1. Jones DA, DeVita MA, Bellomo R. Rapid-response teams. New England Journal of Medicine. 2011;365(2):139-46.
  2. Chan PS, Jain R, Nallmothu BK, Berg RA, Sasson C. Rapid response teams: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of internal medicine. 2010;170(1):18-26.
  3. Chuang T-YA, Yii N, Nyandowe M, Iyer R. Examine the impact of the implementation of an electronic medical record system on operating theatre efficiency at a teaching hospital in Australia. International Surgery Journal. 2019;6(5):1453-7.
  4. Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S, Maglione M, Mojica W, Roth E, et al. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of internal medicine. 2006;144(10):742-52.
  5. Rahimi B, Safdari R, Jebraeily M. Development of hospital information systems: User participation and factors affecting it. Acta Informatica Medica. 2014;22(6):398.
  6. Coiera E, Ash J, Berg M. The unintended consequences of health information technology revisited. Yearbook of medical informatics. 2016;25(01):163-9.
  7. Kushniruk AW, Triola MM, Borycki EM, Stein B, Kannry JL. Technology induced error and usability: the relationship between usability problems and prescription errors when using a handheld application. International journal of medical informatics. 2005;74(7-8):519-26.
  8. Yasemi Z, Rahimi B, Khajouei R, Yusefzadeh H. Evaluating the Usability of a Nationwide Pharmacy Information System in Iran: Application of Nielson’s Heuristics. Journal of Clinical Research in Paramedical Sciences. 2018;7(2):e80331.
  9. Jokela T, Iivari N, Matero J, Karukka M, editors. The standard of user-centered design and the standard definition of usability: analyzing ISO 13407 against ISO 9241-11. Proceedings of the Latin American conference on Human-computer interaction; 2003.
  10. Nielsen J. Usability engineering: Morgan Kaufmann; 1994.
  11. Tomasi JN, Hamilton MV, Fan M, Pinkney SJ, Middaugh KL, Parshuram CS, et al. Assessing the electronic Bedside Paediatric Early Warning System: A simulation study on decision-making and usability. International journal of medical informatics. 2020;133:103969.
  12. von Dincklage F, Suchodolski K, Lichtner G, Friesdorf W, Podtschaske B, Ragaller M. Investigation of the usability of computerized critical care information systems in Germany. Journal of intensive care medicine. 2019;34(3): 227-37.
  13. Ratwani RM, Reider J, Singh H. A decade of health information technology usability challenges and the path forward. Jama. 2019;321(8):743-4.
  14. Malek-Hosseini SA, Habibzadeh F, Nikeghbalian S. Shiraz organ transplant center: the largest liver transplant center in the world. Transplantation. 2019;103(8):1523-5.
  15. Mehdizadeh H, Ayatollahi H, Esmaeili N, Kamkar M. Designing and building a teledermatology system. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. 2015;25(123):170-84.
  16. Al Ghalayini M, Antoun J, Moacdieh NM. Too much or too little? Investigating the usability of high and low data displays of the same electronic medical record. Health informatics journal. 2020;26(1):88-103.
  17. Marcilly R, Ammenwerth E, Vasseur F, Roehrer E, Beuscart-Zéphir M-C. Usability flaws of medication-related alerting functions: a systematic qualitative review. Journal of biomedical informatics. 2015;55:260-71.
  18. Knols B, Louws M, Hardenbol A, Dehmeshki J, Askari M. The usability aspects of medication-related decision support systems in the inpatient setting: a systematic review. Health informatics journal. 2020;26(1):613-27.
  19. Paterno F, Santoro C. Preventing user errors by systematic analysis of deviations from the system task model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2002;56(2):225-45.
  20. Laubheimer P. Preventing User Errors: Avoiding Unconscious Slips. Nielsen Norman Group. 2019.
  21. Saeidnia HR, Mohammadzadeh Z, Hassanzadeh M. Evaluation of Mobile Phone Healthcare Applications During the Covid-19 Pandemic. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 2021;281:1100-1.


Volume 2, Issue 2 - Serial Number 3
December 2021
Pages 38-43
  • Receive Date: 30 August 2021
  • Revise Date: 19 September 2021
  • Accept Date: 28 November 2021
  • First Publish Date: 01 December 2021