A clearer record of care.
Exploring a better workflow for midwives.
We wanted to understand how GLOWM’s medical records could better support midwives: finding a patient, reviewing earlier visits, and recording care with less effort.
GLOWM brings clinical guidance and record keeping into a mobile app. Our focus was the record-keeping experience and how it could better fit the flow of a visit.
As a research assistant, I worked with my professor on the literature review and platform comparison. I helped organise the papers by topic, bring together recurring concerns, and identify areas of GLOWM to explore further.
This was literature research and platform comparison. We did not interview or observe midwives.
Both are open-source systems built around patient records. They gave us examples of how other tools organise clinical information and visits, helping us question what GLOWM could make clearer.
Our aim was to find useful ideas for GLOWM. Any idea would need to suit midwives and a small phone screen.
Scantlebury and colleagues described extra work when paper and electronic records ran alongside each other. Helou and colleagues showed that midwives and doctors can have different needs from the same record system.
These studies helped us ask whether information was easy to find and whether entering it fitted the work. The birth-outcome papers gave wider context for supporting midwives.
The review pointed to three parts of the record-keeping experience that needed closer attention.
Before opening a record, a midwife needs to confirm the right patient. GLOWM’s list shows IDs and dates of birth, with no visible search or visit status. The app asks users to keep a separate handwritten name-to-ID list. This made patient lookup an area where we wanted to explore a clearer experience.
A midwife may need to check previous care before continuing a visit. GLOWM opens a record as a table of contents, with antenatal visits listed by number. Recent readings and visit dates are not brought together in the first view, so reviewing the history involves opening the relevant sections.
A single antenatal visit includes measurements, checks, and notes. GLOWM puts these into a long form with a mix of number fields, sliders, and yes/no choices. Some labels are repeated. We wanted to explore a clearer way to move through the visit and record exact readings.
Our review led to three ideas to test.
We developed a clearer set of workflow gaps and suggestions for GLOWM. My contribution was helping connect the literature and platform review to those priorities.
So far, our work has produced research findings and suggestions. User testing has not started yet.
We want to redesign GLOWM using feedback from nurses. We are currently waiting for Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval to conduct research with people.
Once we receive approval, we plan to work with nurses at Drexel and other campuses in three stages: