RSS-Feed abonnieren
PDF herunterladen
DOI: 10.1055/a-2688-4056
Information Prioritization and Reading Patterns in Electronic Health Record Nursing Summaries: An Eye-Tracking Case Study
Authors
Funding This work was supported by the University of Minnesota Graduate School, University of Minnesota Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship, and Midwest Nursing Research Society Dissertation Grant (#CON000000104586).
Abstract
Objectives
While nursing summaries in electronic health records are used for initial orientation to a patient's status, research on nurses' use of these summaries remains scarce. This case study conducted an eye-tracking simulation to identify (1) key information types (orders, vital signs, etc.), (2) frequently paired information types, and (3) common sequential patterns of information types within nursing summaries as nurses review simulated patient cases.
Methods
We recruited 33 medical-surgical nurses from a university hospital. As part of an eye-tracking simulation, they reviewed three simulated patients' nursing summaries. A screen-based eye-tracker was used to capture participants' gaze fixation on different information types. For analysis, we used discrete-time Markov chains and sequential pattern mining.
Results
The average total gaze fixation time was 1.77 minutes from 26 analyzed participants' eye gaze data. Most of this time was spent shifting between information types or making notes. “Orders” and “Sidebar” (mini summary of demographics and health status) were the information types that consistently emerged as key areas of focus. Participants tended to read specific information types in pairs and followed a top-to-bottom order of reading on the screen.
Conclusion
When reviewing unfamiliar patient cases, nurses prefer to construct a comprehensive patient narrative. Nursing summaries can be redesigned by prioritizing key information types, grouping relevant information pairs, and arranging information in a top-to-bottom manner based on relevance. We recommend that hospitals and EHR vendors prioritize the customization of nursing summaries to align with nurses' information needs and workflows. Tailored summary layout improvements beyond a one-size-fits-all design, informed by interdisciplinary collaboration, can enhance information reading efficiency.
Keywords
cognition - electronic health records and systems - interfaces and usability - nurse - temporal data miningProtection of Human and Animal Subjects
The study was approved by the university's Institutional Review Board.
Publikationsverlauf
Eingereicht: 19. März 2025
Angenommen: 21. August 2025
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
01. Oktober 2025
© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Kutney-Lee A, Sloane DM, Bowles KH, Burns LR, Aiken LH. Electronic health record adoption and nurse reports of usability and quality of care: the role of work environment. Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10 (01) 129-139
- 2 Senathirajah Y, Kaufman DR, Cato KD, Borycki EM, Fawcett JA, Kushniruk AW. Characterizing and visualizing display and task fragmentation in the electronic health record: mixed methods design. JMIR Hum Factors 2020; 7 (04) e18484
- 3 Wisner K, Lyndon A, Chesla CA. The electronic health record's impact on nurses' cognitive work: an integrative review. Int J Nurs Stud 2019; 94: 74-84
- 4 Roman LC, Ancker JS, Johnson SB, Senathirajah Y. Navigation in the electronic health record: a review of the safety and usability literature. J Biomed Inform 2017; 67: 69-79
- 5 Park S, Marquard J, Austin RR, Pieczkiewicz D, Jantraporn R, Delaney CW. A systematic review of nurses' perceptions of electronic health record usability based on the human factor goals of satisfaction, performance, and safety. Comput Inform Nurs 2024; 42 (03) 168-175
- 6 Staggers N, Clark L, Blaz JW, Kapsandoy S. Why patient summaries in electronic health records do not provide the cognitive support necessary for nurses' handoffs on medical and surgical units: insights from interviews and observations. Health Informatics J 2011; 17 (03) 209-223
- 7 Pauszek JR. An introduction to eye tracking in human factors healthcare research and medical device testing. Hum Factors Healthc 2023; 3: 100031
- 8 Hofmaenner DA, Herling A, Klinzing S. et al. Use of eye tracking in analyzing distribution of visual attention among critical care nurses in daily professional life: an observational study. J Clin Monit Comput 2021; 35 (06) 1511-1518
- 9 Simmons B, Lanuza D, Fonteyn M, Hicks F, Holm K. Clinical reasoning in experienced nurses. West J Nurs Res 2003; 25 (06) 701-719 , discussion 720–724
- 10 Gold JA, Stephenson LE, Gorsuch A, Parthasarathy K, Mohan V. Feasibility of utilizing a commercial eye tracker to assess electronic health record use during patient simulation. Health Informatics J 2016; 22 (03) 744-757
- 11 Khairat S, Coleman C, Ottmar P, Bice T, Carson SS. Evaluation of physicians' electronic health records experience using actual and perceived measures. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2022; 19 (01) 1k
- 12 Brown PJ, Marquard JL, Amster B. et al. What do physicians read (and ignore) in electronic progress notes?. Appl Clin Inform 2014; 5 (02) 430-444
- 13 Park S, Marquard J, Austin R, Pieczkiewicz D, Delaney C. . Usability of electronic health records from nurses' perspectives: A systematic review. In: 2022 IEEE 10th International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI). IEEE; 2022 :511–512. doi:10.1109/ICHI54592.2022.00091
- 14 Hu T, Wang X, Xu H. Eye-tracking in interpreting studies: a review of four decades of empirical studies. Front Psychol 2022; 13: 872247
- 15 Seeber KG. Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: measures and methods. Target Int J Transl Stud. 2013; 25 (01) 18-32
- 16 Park S, Marquard JL, Austin RR, Martin CL, Pieczkiewicz DS, Delaney CW. Exploratory co-design on electronic health record nursing summaries: case study. JMIR Form Res 2025; 9: e68906-e68906
- 17 American Association of Colleges of Nursing. . Nursing Workforce Fact Sheet. American Association of Colleges of Nursing. April 2024 . Accessed December 25, 2024 at: https://www.aacnnursing.org/news-data/fact-sheets/nursing-workforce-fact-sheet
- 18 Doberne J, He Z, Gold J, Marquard J, Chiang M. . Using high-fidelity simulation and eye tracking to characterize EHR workflow patterns among hospital physicians. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. Published online 2015:1881–1889.
- 19 Henneman EA, Marquard JL, Fisher DL, Gawlinski A. Eye tracking: a novel approach for evaluating and improving the safety of healthcare processes in the simulated setting. Simul Healthc 2017; 12 (01) 51-56
- 20 Shic F, Scassellati B, Chawarska K. . The incomplete fixation measure. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications - ETRA '08. ACM Press; 2008 :111. doi: 10.1145/1344471.1344500
- 21 Understanding Tobii Pro Lab's eye tracking metrics. Tobii. November 22, 2024 . Accessed July 3, 2025 at: https://connect.tobii.com/s/article/understanding-tobii-pro-lab-eye-tracking-metrics?language=en_US
- 22 Spedicato G. Discrete time Markov chains with R. R J 2017; 9 (02) 84-104
- 23 Tolentino DA, Subbian V, Gephart SM. Applying computational ethnography to examine nurses' workflow within electronic health records. Nurs Res 2021; 70 (02) 132-141
- 24 Gotz D, Wang F, Perer A. A methodology for interactive mining and visual analysis of clinical event patterns using electronic health record data. J Biomed Inform 2014; 48: 148-159
- 25 Le HH, Yamada T, Honda Y. et al. Analyzing Sequence Pattern Variants in Sequential Pattern Mining and Its Application to Electronic Medical Record Systems. In: Hartmann S, Küng J, Chakravarthy S, Anderst-Kotsis G, Tjoa AM, Khalil I. eds. Database and Expert Systems Applications. Vol 11707 . Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing; 2019: 393-408 . doi:10.1007/978-3-030-27618-8_29
- 26 Burch M. . Mining and visualizing eye movement data. In: SIGGRAPH Asia 2017 Symposium on Visualization. ACM; 2017 :1–8. doi:10.1145/3139295.3139304
- 27 Yang Q, Luo T, Zhang W, Zhong X, He P, Zheng H. Data-driven treatment pathways mining for early breast cancer using cSPADE algorithm and system clustering. Int J Health Plann Manage 2022; 37 (05) 2569-2584
- 28 Buchta C, Hahsler M, Diaz D. arulesSequences: Mining frequent sequences. 2013 ;(R package version 0):2–4
- 29 Lindsay MR, Lytle K. Implementing best practices to redesign workflow and optimize nursing documentation in the electronic health record. Appl Clin Inform 2022; 13 (03) 711-719
- 30 Sutton DE, Fogel JR, Giard AS, Gulker LA, Ivory CH, Rosa AM. Defining an essential clinical dataset for admission patient history to reduce nursing documentation burden. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (03) 464-473
- 31 Koopman RJ, Steege LMB, Moore JL. et al. Physician information needs and electronic health records (EHRs): time to reengineer the clinic note. J Am Board Fam Med 2015; 28 (03) 316-323
- 32 Nolan ME, Siwani R, Helmi H, Pickering BW, Moreno-Franco P, Herasevich V. Health IT usability focus section: data use and navigation patterns among medical ICU clinicians during electronic chart review. Appl Clin Inform 2017; 8 (04) 1117-1126
- 33 Cho I, Kim E, Choi WH, Staggers N. Comparing usability testing outcomes and functions of six electronic nursing record systems. Int J Med Inform 2016; 88: 78-85
- 34 Han H, Lopp L. Writing and reading in the electronic health record: an entirely new world. Med Educ Online 2013; 18 (01) 1-7