Touchscreens have taken over nearly everything.
So why do some of the most advanced medical devices still rely on physical buttons?
Our phones have almost no buttons. Cars are replacing traditional controls with massive displays. Even household appliances now come equipped with touchscreens.
Yet walk into a hospital, and you'll find medical equipment worth tens of thousands of dollars still using physical switches, knobs, and buttons.
Ventilators, infusion pumps, surgical equipment, and patient monitors often combine sophisticated digital displays with controls that look surprisingly old-fashioned.
Is medical technology falling behind?
Not exactly.
There is intent behind the integration of physical buttons into medical devices. Sometimes the safest way to design a medical device is knowing when to avoid using a touchscreen.
Think about when you are using your keyboard without looking down at the keys. You might identify the location of the F and J keys by the raised lines on the key. Or locate the shift button due to its larger, elongated key relative to those around them.
These are important details in physical interfaces that can directly carry over to devices in an emergency, operating, or radiology room.
Imagine that a device has a physical dial.
The operator can feel its position, how far its rotated by soft clicks, and make necessary adjustments without relying purely on visual feedback.
That distinction matters.
In a hospital, medical professionals are often managing several tasks simultaneously. Their attention may be divided between the patient, surrounding equipment, and other members of the medical team.
A physical control can provide tactile feedback that a conventional touchscreen cannot.
That doesn't automatically make buttons safer in every situation, but it gives engineers another way to help users interact with equipment reliably.
Touchscreens work well under ideal conditions. Hospitals are not always ideal environments.
Medical professionals are always wearing gloves. Equipment itself may be exposed to moisture or other contaminants.
Depending on the touchscreen technology, touch sensitivity can become a serious issue.
Physical buttons have their own disadvantages, including potential cleaning challenges and mechanical wear. But appropriately designed switches can offer predictable operation in situations where touch input may be less convenient.
This is why medical device engineers cannot simply choose whichever interface looks the most modern.
They have to consider how, where, and by whom the device will actually be used.
Think about the familiar red emergency stop button found on many industrial machines.
There's a reason it isn't hidden three menus deep on a digital display.
When an urgent situation occurs, the operator needs to identify and activate the control quickly.
Physical controls can be designed to stand out through their shape, size, location, color, and tactile characteristics.
Similar principles influence medical equipment, although the appropriate emergency controls depend on the device and its intended use.
For certain critical functions, engineers may prefer dedicated controls that remain easy to locate and operate without navigating a complex interface.
A touchscreen can display hundreds of functions within a relatively small area.
But that flexibility isn't always an advantage when a user needs immediate access to one specific function.
Sometimes accessibility matters more than versatility.
Of course, there's a reason touchscreens have become so popular.
They can simplify complicated interfaces, display detailed information, guide users through procedures, and reduce the number of dedicated physical controls.
A single display can present patient information, equipment settings, alarms, and instructions that would be difficult to communicate through buttons alone.
Software-driven interfaces can also adapt to different workflows and present relevant controls when needed.
For complex medical equipment, those capabilities can be extremely valuable.
The challenge is deciding which functions benefit from digital flexibility and which require more immediate, tactile interaction.
That decision should be based on the device's intended users, operating environment, risks, and usability testing.
Not simply on what looks impressive.
One of the most interesting things about good product design is that users rarely notice it.
A well-designed medical device doesn't force a clinician to stop and think about where a critical control is located.
It doesn't make routine operations unnecessarily complicated.
It doesn't prioritize appearance at the expense of usability.
Instead, the interface feels natural.
That's the result of careful engineering, thoughtful design, and testing with representative users.
In medical device development, usability isn't merely about convenience. It can directly influence whether a device is used safely and effectively.
And sometimes, achieving that goal means choosing a physical button over a sleek digital alternative.
If you have questions about the development process, feel free to reach out for help. We do hundreds of free consults every year to help guide innovators along their path of device development.