Evaluation of Two New Ecological Interface Approaches for the Anesthesia Workplace
Evaluation of Two New Ecological Interface Approaches for the Anesthesia Workplace
复制标题
麻醉工作场所两种新的生态界面方法的评估
DOI：
10.1023/a:1011462726040
复制
发表时间：
2004
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
G. Rau
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Jungk;B. Thull;A. Hoeft;G. Rau
目标。目前，重要参数通常显示为沿时间轴的趋势。然而，临床决策更多的是基于概念，如麻醉深度，这些概念是通过结合参数关系和其他上下文信息而得出的。目前的显示器不能可视化这些概念，因此不能最佳地支持决策过程。新的显示器应该呈现一个生态界面（EI）。EI设计的原则是将决策所需的所有信息可视化地显示在一个显示器中。方法。在第一种方法中，我们开发了一个EI，可以可视化麻醉监测的35个相关参数。所有参数均由麻醉软件模拟器生成。16名麻醉师必须执行两种模拟全麻：在一种设置中仅使用模拟器的监测器（“simmonly”），在另一种设置中使用模拟器的监测器和EI（“Combi1”）。在每次实验中，必须确定一个意外的关键事件（失血或袖带渗漏）。通过记录受试者的眼球运动和大声思考来分析控制和监测行为。在眼动追踪结果的帮助下，我们重新设计了EI。新的EI在没有眼动追踪（“Combi2”）的情况下，在8位麻醉师身上进行了与“Combi1”类似的测试。“Combi1”组（8例中有7例，时间(T): 65 s±73 s）明显快于“simmonly”组（8例中有6例，时间：222 s±187 s）。Combi1组8例患者中有5例（时间：215 s±76 s）与simmonly组（所有病例，时间：217 s±72 s）的出血量相同。在“Combi1”中，EI被用作主要的信息来源（占43%±19%的时间），并且在识别不断发展的关键事件时经常受到青睐。在“Combi2”中，8例患者中有7例（T: 70±111s）与“Combi1”中一样快地发现袖带渗漏。在所有病例中，“Combi2”的失血量比“Combi1”和“simmonly”的失血量明显更快（T: 147 s±62 s）。结论。结果表明，适当设计的情绪评价可以提高麻醉师的决策能力，并将注意力集中在具体问题上。现在，这些发现必须在未来的研究中进行测试，通过使用其他模拟场景扩大范围，并在手术室的真实条件下更接近现实。眼动追踪被证明是分析麻醉师决策和适当重新设计面部的有效方法。
Objective.Currently, vital parameters are commonly displayed as trends along a timeline. However, clinical decisions are more often based upon concepts, such as the depth of anesthesia, that are derived by combining parameter relationships and additional context information. The current displays do not visualize such concepts and therefore do not optimally support the decision process. A new display should present an ecological interface (EI). The principle of EI design is to visualize all of the information necessary for decision making in one single display. Methods.In the first approach, we developed an EI that visualizes 35 relevant parameters for anesthesia monitoring. All of the parameters are generated by an anesthesia software simulator. Sixteen anesthetists had to administer two simulated general anesthetics: in one setting working only with the simulator's monitors (“SimOnly”), and in another setting working with the simulator's monitors in combination with the EI (“Combi1”).During each experiment, one unexpected critical incident (either blood loss or a cuff leakage) had to be identified. The control and monitoring behavior was analyzed by recording the subjects' eye movements and think-a loud protocol. With the help of the eye-tracking results, we re-designed the EI. The new EI was then tested with no eye tracking (“Combi2”) on eight anesthetists under analogous conditions as in “Combi1.”Results.Cuff leakage was identified significantly quicker in“Combi1” (7 of 8 cases; time (T): 65 s ± 73 s)than in “SimOnly” (6 of 8 cases; T: 222 s ±187 s). Blood loss was identified in 5 of 8 cases (T: 215 s± 76 s) in “Combi1” as quickly as in“SimOnly” (all cases; T: 217 s ± 72 s). In“Combi1,” the EI was used as the main source of information (in43 ± 19% of time) and was frequently favored when identifying an evolving critical incident. In “Combi2,” cuff leakage was identified in 7 of 8 cases (T: 70s ± 111s) as quickly as in“Combi1.” Blood loss was identified significantly quicker in all cases (T: 147 s ± 62 s) in “Combi2” than in“Combi1” and in “SimOnly.” Conclusion.The results have shown that appropriately designed EIs may improve the anesthetist's decision making and focus attention on specific problems. Now, the findings have to be tested in future studies by widening the scope using other simulated scenarios and being closer to reality under real conditions in the OR. Eye tracking proved to be a useful method to analyze the anesthetists' decision making and appropriately re-designinter faces.
影响因子：
6.3
作者：
M. Just;P. Carpenter
通讯作者：
M. Just;P. Carpenter