Enhancing the User Experience of a Perioperative Digital Health Tool for Information Exchange Using a Human-Centered Design Thinking Approach: Qualitative Observational Study.
Charlé Steyl, Carljohan Orre, Greg Foster, Hanel Duvenage, Michelle S Chew, Hyla Louise Kluyts
Abstract
Open AccessBackground: Perioperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) allow patients to share their experiences of surgical procedures with their health care teams using standardized measures. Despite increasing recognition of their value, PROs are not routinely used in clinical practice, partly due to limited evidence of their impact on traditional clinical outcomes and uncertainty among clinicians about their use. Digital health tools offer a promising way to integrate PROs into clinical workflows and enhance patient-clinician interaction, but their success depends on person-centered design to ensure usability and relevance. Safe Surgery South Africa, a nonprofit organization, developed the Perioperative Shared Health Record (PSHR), a secure web-based tool that enables patients to share personal health information and PROs with their anesthetist and surgeon before and after surgery. Initial implementation revealed significant user experience challenges, which contributed to poor uptake. Objective: This study aimed to explore factors influencing the PSHR user experience in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) using human-centered design principles. Methods: This observational qualitative user experience study followed the 5 design thinking stages: empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test. Semistructured interviews were conducted with postoperative patients from both the public and private health care sectors, including those with and with no prior experience using the PSHR. Thematic analysis followed the 6-phase framework described by Braun and Clarke and was structured using Karagianni's Optimized Honeycomb user experience model. A problem statement was developed, followed by ideation to explore solutions. Paper prototypes were created, refined, and tested through observation, interviews, and validated usability questionnaires. Results: In the empathize stage, 22 interviews were conducted in the private and public health care sectors in South Africa; 7 participants had previous experience using the PSHR. In the define stage, participants emphasized the need for connection, feedback, information, and support through their surgical journey. Contrary to expectations, patients were not discouraged by the length of questionnaires if they perceived them as purposeful. In the ideate stage, the team considered user expectations and PSHR integration into care processes. In the prototype stage, low-fidelity mock-ups were created and refined into paper prototypes. In the test stage, testing with 5 participants highlighted the importance of trust, communication, and user-friendly interfaces. Feedback loops and clinician engagement were identified as key motivators for sustained use. The mean usability questionnaire scores indicated excellent usability and high levels of user satisfaction across most domains. Conclusions: This study is one of the first to apply human-centered design principles to a perioperative digital health tool in an LMIC setting, addressing usability challenges and patient engagement. Key user experience factors influencing patient engagement included communication, feedback, and access to information throughout the surgical journey. Digital health tools such as the PSHR can strengthen communication and support person-centered perioperative care by integrating PROs into clinical workflows and care processes.