ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2023
National survey of user-reported usability of electronic medical record software in ophthalmology in Germany.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- EMR usability and patient safety: a national survey of physicians.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- A mobile health application that supports a patient centered approach to cardiovascular risk management.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA nationwide, comparative survey of the physician-reported usability of electronic medical record (EMR) software used by ophthalmologists in Germany using the System Usability Scale (SUS) as a standardized metric.
methodsA cross-sectional survey of members of the German Ophthalmological Society (DOG) and professional association of ophthalmologists (BVA) was conducted in May 2022. All 7788 physician members of both societies were invited to participate in an anonymous online-survey by individualized links. User-reported usability of the participants main software used for electronic medical recordkeeping was assessed using the SUS (range 0-100).
resultsA total of 881 participants with 51 different EMRs completed the entire questionnaire. Mean EMR-SUS score was 65.7 (SD ± 23.5). Significant differences in mean SUS of several EMR programs were observed with a range of 31.5 to 87.2 in programs with 10 or more responses. 31.8% of all main program SUS ratings were below 50 points. Female gender was associated with 4.02 higher SUS score (95% CI 0.46-7.59). Main program SUS was positively correlated with overall work-related satisfaction and work environment SUS but negatively correlated with the number of programs in the work environment. The SUS of the entire digital work environment including all programs used daily was closely correlated with the main EMR SUS, but not the number of programs used.
conclusionOur survey revealed a fragmented pattern of EMR use by ophthalmologists in Germany with many competing software products and widely diverging mean System Usability Scale scores. A considerable share of ophthalmologists report EMR usability below what is commonly considered acceptable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37378879What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.