Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41525653›Full record

Observational studyJMIR perioperative medicine2026

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 readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JMIR perioperative medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Charlé SteylDepartment of Anaesthesiology, School of Medicine, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9829-2248
Carljohan OrreDepartment of Computer Science and Media Technology, Malmö University, Nordenskiöldsgatan 1, Malmö, 211 19, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2070-6337
Greg FosterDepartment of Information Systems, Rhodes University, Makhanda, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5272-8138
Hanel DuvenageSafe Surgery South Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3604-2993
Michelle S ChewDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Linköping University, Linkoping, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2888-4111
Hyla Louise KluytsDepartment of Anaesthesiology, School of Medicine, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9917-1330

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: 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.

Indexed as

Health Information ExchangePerioperative CareUser-Centered DesignAdultDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQualitative ResearchSouth Africadesign thinkingdigital healthhuman-centered designpatient participationpatient-reported outcome measuresperioperative careperson-centered careuniversal designuser-centered designuser experience research

Identifiers

PMID41525653
PMCPMC12795411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.