A Framework for Agile and UX Integration in Healthcare Software

Development: A Kanban Approach

Emanuel P. Vicente

1 a

, Wilamis K. N. da Silva

1 b

, Geraldo T. G. Neto

2 c

and Gustavo H. S. Alexandre

1 d

CESAR, Recife Center for Advanced Studies and Systems, Apolo Street, Recife, Brazil

IFMS, Federal Institute of Mato Grosso do Sul, Corumb

a, Brazil

{epv, wkns, ghsa}@cesar.school, geraldo.galindo@ifms.edu.br

Keywords:

Usability, Usability Method, UCD, Usage-Centered, Medical-Hospital System, Doctor, Health, Medicine,

Patient Safety.

Abstract:

The expansion of medical applications increasingly requires quality in their interfaces to mitigate usability

problems and improve the patient experience. The development of healthcare applications presents challenges

in the ﬁeld of usability due to the risk of impact on patient safety. This article addressed these issues by in-

tegrating User-Centered Design and Agile Software Development (ASD), creating several kanban boards to

organize the ﬂow of tasks between designers and developers. This study evaluated the integration of User-

Centered Design (UCD) practices the use of Kanban as an ASD method during the development of an elec-

tronic appointment scheduling subsystem in a Hospital Information System (SIS). Semi-structured interviews

were carried out with 10 project members on fourteen questions about the challenges and opportunities of

integrating UCD practices with the Kanban method in the healthcare context. Through qualitative analysis,

we concluded that the integration of these approaches led to the expansion of software engineering knowledge

in the area of usability, UX and agile development, in addition, it helped to organize the ﬂow of activities,

improve the relationship between interaction and development designers teams. developers and reduce the

number of usability problems in healthcare software products.

1 INTRODUCTION

Currently, the software industry has invested in in-

creasingly innovative solutions in the healthcare area

and has driven the digital transformation of this area,

with the development of applications, platforms and

healthcare information systems that have been trans-

forming the form of interaction between patients and

Health professionals.

The use of digital tools that can assist health-

care providers like Clinical Decision Support Sys-

tems (CDSS) are increasingly present in the daily

lives of healthcare professionals, in hospitals and

clinics, helping with diagnosis and decision-making

and improve various aspects of healthcare delivery,

such as patient safety, clinical management, diagnos-

tic support, cost management, and administrative ef-

https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9859-8819

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8530-5916

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7244-8822

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8347-6383

ciency (Abell et al., 2023). CDSS can take diferent

forms, such as guideline-based algorithms for chronic

disease risk and screening, personalized medication

dosing, and alerts for potential or historical adverse

events.

These systems are widely used in various health-

care environments and play an important role in pro-

viding healthcare services that ensure safety, efﬁ-

ciency and effectiveness (Woldemariam and Jimma,

2023). However, research has shown that several

healthcare systems have faced some usability chal-

lenges leading to clinician frustration and workﬂow

inefﬁciencies (Kalli, 2022).

Also, previous research work on usability of Hos-

pital Information System (HIS) and CDSS suggests

that poor usability contributes to the decreased cogni-

tive performance of clinicians, low efﬁciency, work-

ﬂow interruption or disorientation, raised medical er-

ror risks and higher numbers of adverse events (Gho-

rayeb et al., 2023).

In this context, Agile Software Development

(ASD) can be an alternative to mitigating this chal-

Vicente, E. P., da Silva, W. K. N., Neto, G. T. G. and Alexandre, G. H. S.

A Framework for Agile and UX Integration in Healthcare Software Development: A Kanban Approach.

DOI: 10.5220/0013279900003929

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2025) - Volume 2, pages 525-532

ISBN: 978-989-758-749-8; ISSN: 2184-4992

525

lenge. Annually, the State of Agile survey

conducts

a survey with professionals in the agile context with

the aim of understanding the beneﬁts and challenges

of adopting agile. In 2023, it was observed that 59%

of professionals were either very or somewhat satis-

ﬁed with Agile in their organizations to support of im-

provements in their development process and also to

achieve a digital transformation throughout the entire

development cycle of their products.

Despite this, it is observed that agile methods

and usability practices are not part of the same pro-

cess, despite the ISO/IEC-9126(2003) standard indi-

cating that usability is considered a technical quality

attribute for software design, even if usability is con-

sidered a non-functional requirement in Software En-

gineering (SE).

Usability can be considered as one of the main

quality characteristics of a system. Usability can be

deﬁned by ease of use and the extent to which a prod-

uct is used efﬁciently, effectively and satisfactorily by

speciﬁc users in carrying out objectives(Iso, 1998). A

poor usability score generates a drop in user efﬁciency

and widespread dissatisfaction with the quality of an

HIS (Farrahi et al., 2019).

In this context, it is necessary to adopt prac-

tices to guarantee an agile software development pro-

cess, but also including a humanized look with User-

Centered Design (UCD), making it necessary to di-

rect attention to end users during all phases of a soft-

ware project. This look is described by Lowder-

milk(LOWDERMILK, 2019) such as UCD where us-

ability processes are focused on the end user, resulting

in a better quality application from the perspective of

those who use the system.

For HIS with usability problems, the impact of

usability failures increases the chance of medical er-

ror and can lead to a disaster, such as prescribing the

wrong medications or inappropriate dosages (Koppel

et al., 2005) and (Jaspers, 2009). On the other hand,

systems with high usability help users to carry out

their tasks safely, quickly, easily and with minimal

mental effort(Rezaei-Hachesu et al., 2016). There-

fore, it is highly recommended that during the devel-

opment of new systems, usability is regularly eval-

uated during all phases of construction, in order to

identify and resolve unforeseen problems(Khajouei

and Jaspers, 2010).

This article proposes the application of integrated

UCD practices in an agile context using Kanban dur-

ing the development of an HIS subsystem in a large

military hospital.

https://stateofagile.com/

2 RELATED WORK

One of the ﬁrst works to carry out this discussion was

carried out by Constantine and Lockwood (Constan-

tine and Lockwood, 2002) proposed a simpliﬁed ver-

sion of User-Centered Design (UCD) aimed at inte-

grating ’lightweight’ agile methods. Their study high-

lighted that UCD can be effectively combined with

agile processes through user involvement in initial

phases, facilitating better planning and usability eval-

uation

It was found that users themselves could con-

tribute to writing ”user stories” and help in modeling

and prioritizing design activities. This characteristic

of approaching the user in the initial phases of the re-

quirements elicitation process is one of the usability

principles and allows the contexts of use to be identi-

ﬁed, as well as providing better support for the plan-

ning and deﬁnition of usability evaluation parameters.

Sy (2007) presents a working model that seeks

to integrate UCD activities in a generic way into the

ASD(Sy, 2007) process. Based on the basic process

of incremental development, and conceptualizing the

activity of the design and development teams to oc-

cur separately, the author proposes the use of alter-

nating activities originating in a cycle prior to the be-

ginning of the development cycles, only for initial re-

quirements elicitation and scope planning in the ﬁrst

development cycle. In this way, requirements gath-

ering and planning activities would always be carried

out one cycle in advance of the interface development

cycle, remaining for a round after quality veriﬁcation

and testing activities.

Despite the evolution of the model proposed by

Sy, it does not present a solution for managing

changes during interactions, caused by less commu-

nication between teams throughout the cycles and the

fact that both teams are working on different sets of

features to be implemented. To solve this problem

Silva(Da Silva et al., 2012) proposes some changes to

the model, allowing, throughout the cycles, commu-

nication between teams, in addition to increasing the

scope of team activities to cover not only the immedi-

ately subsequent cycles, but also the previous ones. It

is also noteworthy that both Sy and Silva’s approaches

do not present a closure cycle for the project in terms

of quality veriﬁcation for the ﬁnal product develop-

ment cycle.

Next, some studies that proposed integration be-

tween ASD and UCD will be presented. This topic

will present three studies on the integration of usabil-

ity processes with the main agile methods such as:

XP, Scrum and Kanban, with the main attention fo-

cused on this last method, which is the focus of the

study our thesis.

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

526

2.1 Integration Between UX and XP

Silva(Silva et al., 2009), presented XPu as a method

of integration between XP and the Praxis-u usability

process. Method used in the Department of Com-

puter Science at the Federal University of Minas

Gerais - UFMG and integrated into Praxis (de P

adua

Paula Filho, 2009).

In the XPu method, technical activities begin with

User Analysis, which is carried out using Personas

(Cooper et al., 2014). Developed by Alan Cooper

(Cooper et al., 2014), this technique aims to charac-

terize groups of end users through direct observation

of users in their usual work environments. Through

the use of Personas, it is possible to produce simple

and typical prototypes for these end users.

In addition to the production of prototypes, Task

Analysis takes place in parallel through the produc-

tion of Scripts (Rosson and Carroll, 2002). Scripts

are used as an HCI technique that textually describes

the details of the execution of a task by a user pro-

ﬁle. The Scripts are, therefore, the representation of

usage situations, being used to understand users and

their respective needs.

The Usability Context Analysis completes its ac-

tivities at the end of the User Analysis and Task Anal-

ysis, which will result in the representation of Usabil-

ity Stories. Usability Stories and User Stories, already

used by the XP method, cannot be confused, as there

is an important difference between them. Since User

Stories are written by the client in the XP method,

Usability Stories are described by the Interaction De-

signer, which is a role suggested by the second edition

of the XP method (BECK, ) and incorporated and im-

plemented by XPu. The Interaction Designer, who is

assisted by the client, is responsible for all proposed

usability activities.

2.2 Integration Between UX and

SCRUM

Singh (Singh, 2008) introduced U-SCRUM, an adap-

tation of the Scrum methodology that integrates us-

ability principles by incorporating a Usability Product

Owner role. This role centralizes usability tasks, ad-

dressing the lack of predeﬁned usability processes in

traditional agile methods. U-SCRUM has shown im-

provements in usability outcomes by ensuring early

and ongoing user involvement.

The work applied this adapted method in busi-

ness oriented projects to obtain validation of the re-

sults. The approach used by U-SCRUM produced

considerable improvements in the level of usability of

the developed artifacts, according to the author, who

pointed out beneﬁts, including for end users and other

stakeholders.

2.3 Integration Between UX and

KANBAN

While signiﬁcant research explores the integration

of UCD practices with XP and Scrum (e.g., (Silva

et al., 2009); (Singh, 2008)), studies on Kanban re-

main limited. Despite its growing adoption in soft-

ware projects (Komus and Kuberg, 2017), academic

exploration of Kanban’s compatibility with UCD is

still emerging.

One of the ﬁrst studies that sought to improve the

integration of Kanban with UCD was carried out by

Sch

on, 2016 (Sch

on et al., 2016). In that study, mul-

tiple kanban boards were implemented to control the

ﬂow of tasks in the design and development teams, as

show in Figure 1.

This study investigated the integration of Human-

Centered Design (HCD) and Kanban with the aim

of gaining market experiences in a real-world con-

text. Their case study showed that requirements ﬂow

into the development process in a structured way, us-

ing a unique kanban board for design and another

for development. This approach increased trans-

parency regarding recurring requirements and con-

tributed to the production of knowledge about the in-

tegration between agility and UCD providing practi-

cal insights into human-centered agile development.

The work demonstrated that the integration of these

approaches produced deliveries with good UX, in

addition to making the development process more

human-centered. Furthermore, he concluded that

cross-functional collaboration between design and de-

velopment teams accelerates product development.

Despite the maturity regarding the integration be-

tween UCD and Agile, after just over two decades of

discussions, it still has challenges mainly in two main

issues: company negligence of UX and UCD, and

decentralization of organizational structure (Welin,

2024)

3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND

STUDY DESIGN

3.1 Objectives

The aim of our study is to gain empirical insights

in the integration of UCD and Kanban and to prove

whether the execution of this action research cy-

cle managed to adapt an integration process between

A Framework for Agile and UX Integration in Healthcare Software Development: A Kanban Approach

527

ASD and UX using Kanban and usability inspections

to overcome the main challenges of integrating these

approaches, as mapped by Salah, (SALAH, 2014) as:

• C1 - Lack of time to plan advance design activi-

ties;

• C2 - Difﬁculty in fragmenting activities;

• C3 - Difﬁculty in prioritizing Design activities;

• C4 - Difﬁculty integrating work between develop-

ers and Designers;

• C5 - Develop usability tests;

• C6 - Design workload; It is

• C7 - Lack of documentation.

3.2 Research Context and Setting

We apply the approach proposed by Sch

on,(Eva-

Maria Sch

on and Thomaschewski, 2016)) to create

multiples kanban boards to organize the ﬂow of tasks

between designers and developers, as detailed in Fig-

ure 1. This paper was carried out as a case study

in military hospital investigation is the integration of

UCD over Kanban in a real world context.

This study was conducted as part of a broader ef-

fort to develop a web app, known as the SANDRA,

based on HIS. The development occurred at an mili-

tar hospital with in Brazil.

3.3 Research Questions

We deﬁned the following research questions which

can be mapped to C1-C7 as followed:

• RQ1 - Does integration between kanban and UCD

help mitigate the lack of time to plan design activ-

ities in advance?

• RQ2 - Does integration between kanban and UCD

improve fragmentation and prioritization of de-

sign activities?

• RQ4- Does the integration between kanban and

UCD improve the relationship between develop-

ers and Designers?

• RQ5 - How multiple kanban boards improve plan-

ning and execution of usability tests?

• RQ6 - Integration between kanban and ASD

helped reduce design workload?

• RQ7 - Integration between kanban and ASD

helped to mitigate a Lack of documentation?

3.4 Ethical Considerations

All data were collected in Portugues and

pseudonymized (deidentiﬁed) with partici-

pants’informed consent. Conﬁdential audio record-

ings of semistructured interviews were used for data

analysis, and participants were identiﬁed only by

alpha-numeric codes.

3.5 Data Collection and Analysis

In order to gain qualitative insights, we conducted

semi-structured interviews with 10 project members.

The interviews were carried out 1 month after the

completion of the project. An interview consisted of

fourteen questions and typically took 20 to 30 min-

utes. The original interview questions (Portuguese

language) can be found in Multimedia Appendix A.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RQ1 - Does integration between kanban and UCD

help mitigate the lack of time to plan design activ-

ities in advance?

Regarding the lack of time to plan the advance of de-

sign activities the integration process sought to en-

courage design planning activities during the imple-

mentation of the scheduling system development ac-

tion plan, as the condition of the activities In frame

design and development, we strive to ensure respon-

siveness to changes in usability and functional re-

quirements.

“design activities were placed ahead of cod-

ing activities. This improved the process as a

whole, as user stories were now written by the

design team and no longer by the project man-

ager or the developer themselves. The pro-

totypes and user stories arrived with greater

detail and context of use, which helped to

mitigate gaps in understanding when imple-

menting the requirements and brought devel-

opment closer to the need for use. ” (E3, De-

veloper).

RQ2 - Does integration between kanban and UCD

improve fragmentation and prioritization of de-

sign activities?

The difﬁculty of fragmenting and prioritizing design

activities was overcome after adopting the adapted in-

tegration model, as it allowed the partitioning of de-

sign activities into groups of smaller activities, and

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

528

Figure 1: Multiple activity ﬂows through the adapted process of multiple kanban boards proposed by Sch

on (Sch

on et al.,

2016).

also allowed adequate planning of Requirements En-

gineering (RE) activities, both usability and func-

tional requirements of the electronic scheduling sys-

tem (E3 and E4). Tactical UX Activities carried out

the work of orchestrating UX operational activities,

coordinating user investigations, their tasks and the

environment of this context of use.

Another beneﬁt reported by an interviewee (E8)

was that the kanban board contributed to better prior-

itization of activities, as with the adoption of differ-

ent kanban boards, each board had its own backlog

and followed their respective execution ﬂows and had

their own people responsible.

Does integration between kanban and UCD im-

prove the relationship between developers and De-

signers?

Integrating developers and designers remains a key

challenge in multidisciplinary projects. However, in-

terviewees (E3, E7) reported that adopting multiple

Kanban boards signiﬁcantly improved collaboration

and accelerated release cycles. For instance, E5 high-

lighted that this approach clariﬁed requirements, fos-

tering effective teamwork between design and devel-

opment teams.

One participant (E5) reported that one of the ben-

eﬁts of cross-functional collaboration, provided by

the adoption of multiple kanban board integrated to

usability approaches, was that developers had a bet-

ter idea of the requirements and there was effective

collaboration between the design and development

teams. The same interviewee also reported that the

”good morning” meetings managed to be quite collab-

orative and managed to bring to light all the informa-

tion necessary for the progress of the day’s activities,

however, another interviewee (E6) reported as a neg-

ative factor that the ”good morning” meetings would

eventually last more than 1 hour.

The meetings at the beginning of the working day

helped developers get the point of view of UX special-

ists and vice versa for certain doubts in their respec-

tive activity boards (E4, E9). The project manager

(E2) also reported that there was greater debate be-

tween developers and designers about complex prob-

lems that the project faced, as well as a greater per-

ception about the speed of the project (E2).

How multiple kanban boards improve planning

and execution of usability tests? For some intervie-

wees (E4, E6, E8 and E9) the process helped develop

usability tests efﬁciently, it also helped in deﬁning

tests and in the activities of deﬁning requirements and

usability metrics/UX, in addition to improving ﬂow

control of existing test cards on the board.

For one interviewee (E9), it was clear that con-

trolling design activities in an exclusive framework

helped to organize the ﬂow of developers’ tasks, as

now so many usability activities were concentrated in

another team, as were the activities of the develop-

ment framework. became leaner and more organized.

Integration between kanban and ASD helped re-

duce design workload? The adapted process made

it possible to balance the workload of Designers (E6

and E4), as it managed to optimize the ﬂow of tasks

on the Design Kanban board and dedicate the team’s

efforts to these activities. According to Salah, not all

organizations have the ﬁnancial resources to allocate

design experts(SALAH, 2014). Using kanban in mul-

tiple boards helped (E4) to optimize this work, as this

function ended up being carried out by a member of

the development team and everything was controlled

in the same square. According to the same intervie-

wee (E4), a permanent team of designers has now

been created and the workload has been balanced ap-

propriately.

Integration between kanban and ASD helped to

mitigate a Lack of documentation? For Salah

(SALAH, 2014) the lack of documentation is one of

A Framework for Agile and UX Integration in Healthcare Software Development: A Kanban Approach

529

Figure 2: Activity ﬂow of the Kanban and UX integration process.

the major problems affecting the integration between

agile approaches and UCD, however, for the intervie-

wee from the development and Design teams(E3-E7)

The process adopted has documentation on the guide-

lines for executing tasks on Kanban boards, as well

as guidelines for carrying out tactical and operational

activities.

“We plan to insert usability inspection activi-

ties in almost all prototypes developed by the

design team, and iterative carry out reﬁne-

ments that help us document as many aspects

of contexts of use, personas, tasks and user

stories of our interfaces as possible.” (E9, In-

teraction Designer).

An interviewee (E9) reported on the improvement

in the quality of User Stories that arrived in the de-

velopment kanban board’s backlog, coming from the

design board and which underwent successive reﬁne-

ments after the design team used the inspection form

templates, Appendix B.

Finally, one of the members of the operations team

(E9) observed that the versions released for operation

are generating fewer errors.

“Despite the adoption of more activities

within the project with the new framework

system exclusive to Design, I found that the

inclusion of these design activities brought

beneﬁts to the release time in general. This

is because, basically, the time lost with the

construction of UX artifacts was gained back

with the speciﬁcation of requirements en-

riched with details, and this was reﬂected in

more mature interfaces with fewer errors and

bugs. The development team had less re-

work to correct nonconformities in the prod-

uct and code refactoring. We noticed a higher

compliance rate in inspections and unit tests.

The team also gained more effective time to

move cards to implement effectively new sto-

ries. Even the production environment has

generated fewer demands for error correc-

tion.” (E6, Developer).

It was possible to conclude that the multi-kanban

board aprouch guaranteed the agility of the develop-

ment of the scheduling module. It was also possible

to validate that the process brought greater integra-

tion between the DAS and UX approaches. Usabil-

ity inspections ensured the delivery of UX artifacts

with greater details about the personas, their tasks, the

context of use of the interfaces and in which environ-

ment this use would occur. All of this contributed to

requirements engineering being improved to deliver

better stories to be implemented.

The teams separated the demands of the Design

and Development teams, however, this did not result

in the creation of cycles of segregation of specialists,

on the contrary, it brought organization to the ﬂow of

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

530

tasks and the teams were able to work collaboratively.

The report above made by one of the developers

(E6) is very close to the perception described by one

of the operations analysts (E9).

5 THREATS OF VALIDITY

We classiﬁed the threats to the validity of this study,

according to Runeson and Host (Runeson and H

ost,

2009).

Construct Validity. This threat concerns the partic-

ipants’ understanding of the research objective and

the clarity of the interview questions. It also relates

to how effectively we communicated the research

purpose during the interviews. To address this, we

conducted a pilot interview with a PhD researcher

and an industry professional, who evaluated and

validated the instrument, highlighting only minor ad-

justments. Nonetheless, during the actual interviews,

several participants expressed confusion about the

instrument. To address this, we provided additional

explanations to improve its clarity and ensure a better

understanding.

Internal Validity. This refers to the credibility of the

results, as our study adopts a qualitative approach.

The challenges and beneﬁts of evidence-based (EB)

practices identiﬁed may not fully reﬂect reality.

One notable threat to this construct is the limited

size of our interview sample, which may impact

the generalizability of our ﬁndings. To mitigate this

limitation, we speciﬁcally selected professionals with

extensive experience in the ﬁeld. All interviews were

recorded and subsequently transcribed, enabling

multiple reviews of the data to ensure the rigor and

reliability of our analysis.

Reliability. This pertains to the replicability of the

results. To enhance transparency, we ensured that our

data analysis process was clearly documented. We

have included an attachment containing the interview

guide used, along with the evidence that underpins

our ﬁndings, to facilitate reproducibility and support

validation of our results.

6 CONCLUSION

This paper presents the results of a case study relat-

ing to the integration between DCU and ASD during

development of appointment subsystem of HIS. We

contribute to the improvement of requirements engi-

neering by providing:

1. Practical insights into user-centered agile devel-

opment.

2. Empirical research regarding the challenges of in-

tegrating UCD and kanban as ASD (see C1-C7,

3.3) in a real-world context.

3. A proof that our approach covers the integration

of UCD and ASD as a kanban context.

The process model used in this paper, followed by

the guidelines proposed by Sch

on, 2016 (Sch

on et al.,

2016), where the ideation/UX requirements gathering

tasks were organized in a design kanban board, sep-

arate from the development board, where objective is

to organize the ﬂow of activities and increase trans-

parency relation to user research, design and UX, as

well as usability inspection activities under produced

artifacts to improve requirements elicitation. Re-

quirements were continuously evaluated and ﬂowed

through the development process in a structured man-

ner and with fewer usability problems.

We can conclude that the integration of UCD ac-

tivities into Kanban through multiple boards leads to a

product with a good UX and makes the development

process more user-centered. Users of the developed

electronic appointment scheduling system are satis-

ﬁed and their needs have been met. There was good

freedom on the part of project members after adopt-

ing the development process, as well as greater and

more effective cross-functional collaboration between

the design and development teams, which helped to

accelerate product development.

7 FUTURE DIRECTIONS

• Although our work provides signiﬁcant contri-

butions to creating value at ASD, we acknowl-

edge that these contributions are still in their early

stages. Therefore, we propose a series of future

directions that can build upon our ﬁndings: .

• There is a research opportunity to understand how

the adoption of intelligent artiﬁcial resources can

contribute to improving usability and the integra-

tion between ASD and UX.

• Expand this research to assess the contribution

of Intelligence artiﬁcial intelligence and Machine

Learning on the integration between ASD and

UX.

• Future research could explore the impact of re-

mote work on the integration between ASD and

UX in the development of healthcare software,

particularly in the context of changes brought

about by the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Framework for Agile and UX Integration in Healthcare Software Development: A Kanban Approach

531

REFERENCES

Abell, B., Naicker, S., Rodwell, D., Donovan, T., Tariq, A.,

Baysari, M., Blythe, R., Parsons, R., and McPhail,

S. M. (2023). Identifying barriers and facilitators

to successful implementation of computerized clin-

ical decision support systems in hospitals: a nasss

framework-informed scoping review. Implementation

Science, 18(1):32.

BECK, K. Extreme Programming Explained. Stoughton:

Pearson Education, 2004.

Constantine, L. L. and Lockwood, L. (2002). Process agility

and software usability: Toward lightweight usage-

centered design. Information Age, 8(8):1–10.

Cooper, A., Reimann, R., Cronin, D., and Noessel, C.

(2014). About face: the essentials of interaction de-

sign. John Wiley & Sons.

Da Silva, T. S., Silveira, M. S., Maurer, F., and Hellmann,

T. (2012). User experience design and agile develop-

ment: From theory to practice. Journal of Software

Engineering and Applications.

de P

adua Paula Filho, W. (2009). Engenharia de software:

fundamentos, m

etodos e padr

oes, volume 3. Ltc.

Eva-Maria Sch

on, Dominique Winter, J. U. M. J. E. and

Thomaschewski, J. (2016). Enterprise experience into

the integration of human-centered design and kanban.

Farrahi, R., Rangraz Jeddi, F., Nabovati, E., Sadeqi Jabali,

M., and Khajouei, R. (2019). The relationship be-

tween user interface problems of an admission, dis-

charge and transfer module and usability features: a

usability testing method. BMC medical informatics

and decision making, 19:1–8.

Ghorayeb, A., Darbyshire, J. L., Wronikowska, M. W., and

Watkinson, P. J. (2023). Design and validation of a

new healthcare systems usability scale (hsus) for clin-

ical decision support systems: a mixed-methods ap-

proach. BMJ open, 13(1):e065323.

Iso, W. (1998). 9241-11. ergonomic requirements for ofﬁce

work with visual display terminals (vdts). The inter-

national organization for standardization, 45(9).

Jaspers, M. W. (2009). A comparison of usability methods

for testing interactive health technologies: method-

ological aspects and empirical evidence. International

journal of medical informatics, 78(5):340–353.

Kalli, V. D. R. (2022). Human factors engineering in med-

ical device software design: Enhancing usability and

patient safety. Innovative Engineering Sciences Jour-

nal, 8(1):1–7.

Khajouei, R. and Jaspers, M. (2010). The impact of

cpoe medication systems’ design aspects on usability,

workﬂow and medication orders. Methods of informa-

tion in medicine, 49(01):03–19.

Komus, A. and Kuberg, M. (2017). Abschlussbericht: Sta-

tus quo agile 2016/2017. Studie

uber Erfolg und An-

wendungsformen von agilen Methoden.

Koppel, R., Metlay, J. P., Cohen, A., Abaluck, B., Localio,

A. R., Kimmel, S. E., and Strom, B. L. (2005). Role of

computerized physician order entry systems in facili-

tating medication errors. Jama, 293(10):1197–1203.

LOWDERMILK, T. (2019). Design Centrado no Usu

ario:

um guia para o desenvolvimento de aplicativos

amig

aveis. S

ao Paulo: Novatec.

Rezaei-Hachesu, P., Pesianian, E., and Mohammadian, M.

(2016). Evaluating usability of radiology information

systems in hospitals of tabriz university of medical

sciences. Acta Informatica Medica, 24(1):42.

Rosson, M. B. and Carroll, J. M. (2002). Usability en-

gineering: scenario-based development of human-

computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann.

Runeson, P. and H

ost, M. (2009). Guidelines for conduct-

ing and reporting case study research in software engi-

neering. Empirical software engineering, 14(2):131.

SALAH, D., P. R. F. . C. P. (2014). A systematic litera-

ture review for agile development processes and user

centred design integration.

Sch

on, E.-M., Winter, D., Uhlenbrok, J.,

Escalona Cuaresma, M. J., and Thomaschewski,

J. (2016). Enterprise experience into the integration

of human-centered design and kanban. In ICSOFT-

EA 2016: 11th International Joint Conference on

Software Technologies (2016), p 133-140. ScitePress

Digital Library.

Silva, T. R., P

adua, C., and Resende, R. S. (2009). Xpu:

caracterizac¸

ao de agilidade para uma abordagem

agil

visando

a usabilidade. In III Workshop de Desenvolvi-

mento R

apido de Aplicac¸

oes.

Singh, M. (2008). U-scrum: An agile methodology for pro-

moting usability. In Agile 2008 Conference, pages

555–560. IEEE.

Sy, D. (2007). Adapting usability investigations for ag-

ile user-centered design. Journal of usability Studies,

2(3):112–132.

Welin, F. (2024). Integration of user-centered design and

continuous experimentation in agile processes: A

qualitative study.

Woldemariam, M. T. and Jimma, W. (2023). Adoption of

electronic health record systems to enhance the qual-

ity of healthcare in low-income countries: a system-

atic review. BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 30(1).

APPENDIX

Multimedia Appendix A

Metadata of interview questions.

[PDF File , 65 KB-Multimedia Appendix A]

https://drive.google.com/ﬁle/d/1MHDY78blSpfn tK-

bcC8uEKWiG3ShgwnmL

Multimedia Appendix B

Metadata of inspection checklist.

[PDF File , 367 KB-Multimedia Appendix B]

https://drive.google.com/ﬁle/d/1GtRixMGq29n27g

PlCp8JxuHlhjtBN1zF

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

532