Table 2.

Sample “specific” heuristic violations which directly predicted a usability problem

Specific heuristic violation	Corresponding usability problem
Button highlighting is the inverse of the customary design (button greyed out when selected) (Error prevention; EagleSoft).	When asked to select roots of a single tooth for root canal treatment, users deselected the roots which they were supposed to select due to the non standard design.
Numbers 1–6 represent the six surfaces of the tooth that are normally identified by anatomical terms, e.g. bucco-mesial (Match between system and the real world; EagleSoft).	The onscreen numerical keypad to navigate tooth surfaces was mistaken as a means to enter dental pocket depths in mm.
Switching between restorative and periodontal charts is difficult (Recognition rather than recall; EagleSoft).	Several users experienced difficulty when switching from the restorative to the periodontal chart. They suggested providing mechanisms to perform this action more easily.
Trying to record caries on a tooth does not produce a result unless user clicks on one of several poorly labeled buttons (“Eo,” “Ex,” “Tx,” and “Comp”) (Visibility of system status; Dentrix).	Most users experienced difficulty completing tasks that used one of the buttons. The system provided neither feedback nor guidance.
The tool tip for the button to enter root canal therapy (RCT) on a molar tooth indicates that the procedure applies to incisors (Error prevention; Dentrix).	The tool tip misguided users, who, as a result, failed to locate the icon for molar tooth RCT.
Deleting a finding on a tooth should only require selecting the finding and pressing the Delete key or similar action (Consistency and standards; Dentrix).	Most users tried multiple times to delete an amalgam restoration by selecting the tooth and by pressing the delete button on the keyboard, an action that was not supported by any system.