Comparative Usability Evaluation of Two Hospital Information Systems: A Mixed‐Methods Study in an Iranian Teaching Hospital

Background and Aims Usability of hospital information systems (HIS) is critical for workflow efficiency, user satisfaction, and safe clinical practice. Comparative evaluations of legacy desktop‐based HIS and newer web‐based platforms remain limited, particularly during the real‐world digital transition. This study aimed to compare the usability of the legacy Iranian Hospital Information System (IHIS) and the newly implemented web‐based Sepid system in the Inpatient Admission and Radiology modules of a teaching hospital in Mashhad, Iran. Methods This convergent parallel mixed‐methods study was conducted from July to September 2025 at Qaem Educational and Research Hospital. In the qualitative phase, eight expert evaluators conducted heuristic evaluations based on Nielsen's ten usability heuristics. In the quantitative phase, 34 end‐users with routine experience using both systems completed the System Usability Scale (SUS). Qualitative findings were thematically consolidated, and quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and paired comparative tests. Results Heuristic evaluation showed that Sepid's main usability problems were related to system performance, external database integration, and error messaging, whereas IHIS demonstrated more fundamental interface‐related limitations, including visual clutter, weak flexibility, and lack of undo/redo functionality. Quantitatively, Sepid achieved a higher mean SUS score than IHIS (66.25 vs. 51.99). For Sepid, 4 users (11.8%) rated usability as unacceptable, 17 (50.0%) as marginal, and 13 (38.2%) as acceptable. For IHIS, the corresponding values were 12 (35.3%), 19 (55.9%), and 3 (8.8%), respectively. The between‐system difference in SUS scores was statistically significant ( p < 0.001). Conclusion Although Sepid outperformed IHIS, both systems remained within the marginal usability range. The findings indicate that HIS improvement should prioritize user‐centered interface redesign, stronger error prevention, better interoperability with external databases, and continuous user training. These results may guide developers, hospital managers, and policymakers in improving HIS design and implementation during the digital transition.