Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:23:48.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Atypical Use Scenarios as Design Intervention in Healthcare Product Design Application

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

K. Nagarajan ,
G. Koronis ,
K. Subburaj  and
A. Silva
K. Nagarajan*
Affiliation:
Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
G. Koronis
Affiliation:
Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
K. Subburaj
Affiliation:
Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
A. Silva
Affiliation:
Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
*
[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

User experiences of atypical conditions leading to adverse events have the potential to discover latent user needs and improve usability in design outcomes. This study introduces atypical scenarios as a design intervention to student designers working on healthcare product design projects. These atypical scenarios are framed from real-world clinical experience related to individual projects. 40 participants from a healthcare product design course comprising of 8 teams were involved in this study. Results indicate a positive influence on design and designers in terms of usability in the design process.

Keywords

user-centred designhealthcare designdesign activitiesdesign process
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 1323 - 1330
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

AAMI HE75:2009®2018 “Human Factors engineering- Design of medical devices.” Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI), Arlington.Google Scholar
ISO 9241-11:2018 “Ergonomics of human-system interaction”-Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts. Internarional Organization for Standardization, Geneva.Google Scholar
ISO/IEC62366-1. (2015). “Application of usability engineering to medical devices. International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva.Google Scholar
ISO/IEC 25022 (2016). “Systems and software engineering- Systems and software quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE)-Measurement of quality in use.” International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva.Google Scholar
Butler, S. (2020) ‘Adverse Events’, in Gross, K. A. (ed.) Advanced Practice and Leadership in Radiology Nursing, pp. 213–221. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32679-1_19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caixeta, M. C. B. F. et al. . (2013) ‘User Involvement at the Early Stages of Design: a Case Study in Healthcare’, 1th International Postgraduate Research Conference, 2013, 2013, Salford, UK. IPGRC13., At Salford, UK: University of Salford, (January 2013), pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
Carmel-Gilfilen, C. and Portillo, M. (2016) ‘Designing With Empathy: Humanizing Narratives for Inspired Healthcare Experiences’, Health Environments Research and Design Journal, 9(2), pp. 130–146. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1937586715592633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carthey, J. (2021) ‘Participatory Design, Project Clients, and Healthcare User Groups’, HERD. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, 14(2), pp. 96–108. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1937586720948462.Google Scholar
Graffigna, G. and Graffigna, G. (2015) Patient engagement: a consumer-centered model to innovate healthcare. Warsaw; De Gruyter Open. https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110452440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healion, D., O'Dowd, E. and Russell, S. (2018) ‘The Development of a Methodology for Contextual User Research in Healthcare Design Projects’, Studies in health technology and informatics, 256, pp. 239–249.Google ScholarPubMed
Hocking, I. and Vernon, D. (2017) ‘A Bridge Too Far: Conceptual Distance and Creative Ideation’, Creativity Theories – Research – Applications, 4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ctra-2017-0017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koronis, G., Casakin, H. and Silva, A. (2021) ‘Crafting briefs to stimulate creativity in the design studio’, Thinking Skills and Creativity. Elsevier Ltd, 40(March), p. 100810. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. L. et al. . (2006) ‘Capturing user requirements in medical device development: The role of ergonomics’, Physiological Measurement. https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0967-3334/27/8/R01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. L. and Barnett, J. (2012) ‘Integrating the results of user research into medical device development: Insights from a case study’, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 12(1). https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-12-74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
May-Russell, S. (2012) ‘Medical devices designed with patients in mind’, Industrial Pharmacy, (35), pp. 13–15.Google Scholar
McGurk, V. (2018) ‘Prevention is Better Than Cure: Learning from Adverse Events in Healthcare’, Nursing Standard, 32, p. 34. https://dx.doi.org/10.7748/ns.32.21.34.s26.Google Scholar
Mieczakowski, A., King, J. and Fehnert, B. (2014) ‘A Design-Led Research Approach to Contextual Evaluation of Socio-Psychological Factors in the Development of Telehealth Devices’, in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Aging and Assistive Environments - Volume 8515. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 321–332. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07446-7_31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Money, A. G. et al. . (2011) ‘The role of the user within the medical device design and development process: Medical device manufacturers’ perspectives’, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. BioMed Central Ltd, 11(1), p. 15. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-11-15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paltrinieri, N. et al. . (2013) ‘Atypical accident scenarios: From identification to prevention of underlying causes’, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 31, pp. 541–546. https://dx.doi.org/10.3303/CET1331091.Google Scholar
Privitera, M. B., Evans, M. and Southee, D. (2017) ‘Human factors in the design of medical devices – Approaches to meeting international standards in the European Union and USA’, Applied Ergonomics.Google Scholar
Rafter, N. et al. . (2014) ‘Adverse Events in Healthcare: learning from mistakes.’, QJM: monthly journal of the Association of Physicians, 108. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcu145.Google ScholarPubMed
Rafter, N. et al. . (2015) ‘Adverse events in healthcare: Learning from mistakes’, Qjm, 108(4), pp. 273–277. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcu145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raviselvam, S. et al. . (2019) ‘An Extreme User Approach to Identify Latent Needs: Adaptation and Application in Medical Device Design’, ASME 2019 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC2019-98266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reason, J. (2000) ‘Human error: Models and management’, Western Journal of Medicine, 172(6), pp. 393–396. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ewjm.172.6.393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanchez, J. A. et al. . (2017) ‘Investigating the Causes of Adverse Events’, Annals of Thoracic Surgery. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, 103(6), pp. 1693–1699. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.04.001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, A. and Alshawi, S. (2010) ‘The role of user requirements research in medical device development’, Proceedings of the European, Mediterranean and Middle Eastern Conference on Information Systems: Global Information Systems Challenges in Management, EMCIS 2010, (March).Google Scholar
Shah, J., Smith, S. and Vargas Hernandez, N. (2003) ‘Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness’, Design Studies, 24, pp. 111–134. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00034-0.Google Scholar
Smits, M. et al. . (2010) ‘Exploring the causes of adverse events in hospitals and potential prevention strategies’, Quality and Safety in Health Care, 19(5). https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2008.030726.Google ScholarPubMed
Tóvölgyi, S. (2016) ‘User involvement in the ergonomic development of a medical instrument: a longitudinal case study’, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. Taylor and Francis Ltd., 22(2), pp. 207–217. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2015.1131072.Google ScholarPubMed
Vincent, C. (2003) ‘Understanding and Responding to Adverse Events’, The New England journal of medicine, 348, pp. 1051–1056. https://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMhpr020760.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
U.S. Food & Drug Administration(FDA), 2016, What is a severe Adverse event?. Accessed through https://www.fda.gov/safety/reporting-serious-problems-fda/what-serious-adverse-event as of 31/10/2021.Google Scholar