HST eChart - Anesthesia Chart

Duration: July 2019 -  Present

My Role: Lead Designer

Scroll Down

Design Problem

Nurses at surgery centers were experiencing spending too much time on charting anesthesia vitals on eChart and as a result preferring conventional paper charting, with surgery centers losing interest in using eChart for anesthesia procedures.

My Role

End-to-end product designer responsible for all design process in addition to scoping, gathering design requirements and coordinating with stakeholders at every stage and iteration.

 

Contextual Inquiry and Research

To understand the design problem in-depth:

1) I first conducted an in-depth self-evaluation of the whole experience.
2) I then went to one of HST’s surgery centers onsite and conducted a contextual inquiry session with the nurses and observed them interact with the experience in-person.

Duration: Sept 2017 -  Dec 2017

Key Findings

Understanding the charting experience:

Users just look at the monitor and note down the vitals’ symbols for a given time in a matter of few seconds on paper. Whereas on eChart, it was taking them close to a minute
 

Initial Sketches for Ideation

Wireframes

These were the first set of wireframes based on the inititial design requirements presented to the stakeholders for feedback.

Feedback from PM and Engineers

 

  • Add Question Overlay

    • Ability to add multiple questions at a time.

  • Edit/Add a Question

    • Question field should just be text editor – users do not use or understand the plain text option.​

  • Enhance the category drop-down functionality

  • Ability to flag a question, so that it appears in a separate “flag” bloc

  • Editing a response type: Be able to change the response type.  Currently, the user is not able to.

  • A questionnaire or question at any level can be tagged.  A Tag represents an attempt to classify a question in terms of who might be interested in the content.

User Testing Feedback:

  • Delete functionality: Show confirmation message prior to deleting a questionnaire/question.

  • Side by side view of existing questionnaire and questions significantly reduced the task time and number of clicks.

Duration: Sept 2017 -  Dec 2017

Duration: Sept 2017 -  Dec 2017

Personas

Based on the findings from the Affinity Diagramming Exercise, the users' needs and pain-points were clear and we were able to create 4 different user personas who will be the primary users of our web-tool. 

 
Personas-01
Personas-01

press to zoom
Personas-05
Personas-05

press to zoom
Personas-04
Personas-04

press to zoom
Personas-01
Personas-01

press to zoom
1/3

User Journey Mapping

To define our key features for the web-tool, we needed to first create a user journey map for the end to end technology commercialization process, and based on the issues identified at the different stages of the user journey, we come up with features that would address those issues. Following is the customer journey map across the different stages of the technology development process.

Duration: Sept 2017 -  Dec 2017

 
Untitled (1).jpg

Brainstorming and Design Synthesis

Based on our research, we brainstormed several ideas and further proposed our design to function like a website and encompassing:  1) an interactive tool for more personalized recommendations including an interactive map to locate technology clusters, and 2) More generalized information for less tech-savvy users. 

 
IMG_20180927_041949577.jpg
IMG_20180927_042011543.jpg
IMG_20180927_042031851.jpg
IMG_20180927_042052745_HDR.jpg

Users

Users

Federal Researchers

Inventors

Univ. Profs.

Post-Docs, Researchers

Industry Professionals

Industry Professionals

Thought Leaders

Policy makers, leaders etc.

Features

icons8-web-48.png

Simple clear design that resonates with majority of the users' familiarity

icons8-document-48.png

More generalized information for influencers

icons8-one-way-transition-48.png

Interactive tool for guided personalized recommendations

icons8-google-maps-48.png

Interactive map to locate tech. clusters to collaborate based on preferences 

Guided user journey flow

Guided User Journey (1).jpg

Architecture Mapping

Based on the customer journeys and findings before, a site architecture map was created to help inform the design of wireframes 

 
home.png

Wireframes

The next step was creation of wireframes based on the ideas extracted from the User Journey Map. There were further shared with our external web consultants - Palantir

Below are a few initial wireframes. 

Duration: Sept 2017 -  Dec 2017

 
home.png
tech_stage.png
collaborate_-_map.png
collaborate_-_list.png
stage_commercialization.png

Low-fi prototype

A low-fi prototype is currently in progress to be submitted to Palantir to communicate a better understanding of the design ans flow

Iterations

Iteration 1

Based on the user testing session, I received the following feedback, and made the respective iterations:

Feedback: 'Pathways to Innovation' and 'Cross-sector collaboration' are meant to be used by Researchers/Inventors and Industry Leader        specifically, hence the flows need to be tailored accordingly

Revision: An interactive tool which specifically caters to comprises of cross-sector collaboration and pathways to innovation

Feedback: The user flow is currently more 'exploratory' and needs to be more 'directional'

Revision:  1)  More simplified and streamlined user journey.

                  2)  A landing homepage which directs to the user to the specific part of the tool based on their role.

Feedback: 'Thought Leaders' are mostly concerned with general information related to their sector.

Revision: Thought leaders would be led to a separate section which covers general information about the sector and best practices.

Feedback: Maps should be accessible by all as a reference

Revision: A separate tool called 'Resource Maps' accessible from the home page and independent of the interactive tool.

 
NIST Project Website task flow.jpg

Final Iteration

Based on the final usability assessment, I received the following feedback, and made the respective iterations:

Feedback: "No way to know what my responses are, and if I need to revise them"     

Revision: Appropriate feedback and ability to revise responses.

Feedback: Support required when entering responses.

Revision:  A collaborative learning center feature.

 

Hi-fi Prototype

The above design was handed over to EGI after approval and will be in development on securing additional funding from NIST.

Conclusion