| Design Aspect |
Good |
Problematic |
| System as a whole |
- Easily identify key information: contraction, blood pressure, heart beat [1]
- Straight forward, easy to use [5]
- Usable for experienced user (maybe inexperienced as well) [5]
- Gives vital information
- Ugly [6]
|
- Too much information for a patient [1]
- Very data driven and “techie” [2]
- Foreign technology to a patient [2]
- Not able to definitely identify features – guessing necessary [4]
- Experimentation with device needed for understanding [5]
- Not flexible to new user [5]
- Reduce number of features [5]
|
| Layout |
- Clean, not crowded for easy readability [1]
- Aesthetically pleasing [6]
|
- Need medical knowledge to identify all features
- Layout not consistent for every feature [3]
|
| Background |
- Black background provides good contrast [1]
|
- Red on black is not easy to read [6]
|
| Fetal Heart Rate Numbers |
- Large, spread out, colored for easy readability, good contrast, sharp [1]
- Color coding (ex. Yellow= warning) [1]
- Consistent colors used [3]
- Font larger for more important numbers consistently [3]
- FHR symbols look the same and have same meaning [3]
- Based on heart rate, contraction can be identified when rate goes up or down [4]
- Color aesthetically pleasing [6]
|
- Small numbers difficult to read [1]
|
| Symbols/Pictures |
- Pictorial cardiograph good for quick viewing [1]
- Cardiograph big clue of healthcare [4]
|
- Lack of pictorial usage for conducive for patient [2]
|
| Warning |
- Smaller size warning may startle patient less [1]
- Auditory feature to alert of a problem [1]
|
- Not obvious what it relates to and should be larger since it is an important warning [1]
|
| Buttons |
- Buttons all consistently the same size and format[3]
- Appear as touch screen [4]
|
- Menu button lacking graphics and not consistent with computer standards such as Windows [3]
|
*Bold comments represent the feedback that was mentioned more than once