Cargando…
Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience
BACKGROUND: Poor ergonomic design of ventilators can result in human errors. In this study, we evaluated the ergonomics of ventilators through respiratory therapists’ performance, workload, and user experience. MATERIAL/METHODS: Sixteen respiratory therapists were recruited to this usability study o...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
International Scientific Literature, Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6319161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30552313 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.911853 |
_version_ | 1783385024576356352 |
---|---|
author | Jiang, Mingyin Liu, Shenglin Gao, Jiaqi Feng, Qingmin Zhang, Qiang |
author_facet | Jiang, Mingyin Liu, Shenglin Gao, Jiaqi Feng, Qingmin Zhang, Qiang |
author_sort | Jiang, Mingyin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Poor ergonomic design of ventilators can result in human errors. In this study, we evaluated the ergonomics of ventilators through respiratory therapists’ performance, workload, and user experience. MATERIAL/METHODS: Sixteen respiratory therapists were recruited to this usability study of 3 ventilators. Participants had to perform 7 tasks on each ventilator. Respiratory therapists’ performance was measured by task errors of all tasks for each participant. Workload was measured by objective measurement (blink rate and duration) and by subjective measurement (NASA-TLX). User experience was assessed by the USE Questionnaire. RESULTS: For task errors, significant differences were found among ventilators (p<0.05) and the Evital 4 received higher task errors when compared to the Servo I (p<0.05). For blink rate, significant differences were found in tasks of starting the ventilator, ventilator monitoring values recognition, ventilator setting parameters modification, alarm parameter recognition, and resetting among ventilators (p<0.05). Furthermore, blink duration was also found to be significant differently in tasks of starting the ventilator, mode and setting parameters recognition, ventilator monitoring values recognition, ventilator mode modification, and alarm parameter recognition and resetting, as well as in the average of all tasks (p<0.05). For perceived workload, the Evital 4 received higher NASA-TLX scores among ventilators. For user experience, the Servo I received the highest scores on the USE Questionnaire among the ventilators. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides a comprehensive evaluation method of user interface based on respiratory therapists’ performance, workload, and user experience. In addition, this study suggests that the ergonomic design of the Evital 4 is poor. Finally, we found that eye motion (blink rate and duration) may be useful to assess the ergonomics of a user interface. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6319161 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | International Scientific Literature, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63191612019-01-24 Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience Jiang, Mingyin Liu, Shenglin Gao, Jiaqi Feng, Qingmin Zhang, Qiang Med Sci Monit Clinical Research BACKGROUND: Poor ergonomic design of ventilators can result in human errors. In this study, we evaluated the ergonomics of ventilators through respiratory therapists’ performance, workload, and user experience. MATERIAL/METHODS: Sixteen respiratory therapists were recruited to this usability study of 3 ventilators. Participants had to perform 7 tasks on each ventilator. Respiratory therapists’ performance was measured by task errors of all tasks for each participant. Workload was measured by objective measurement (blink rate and duration) and by subjective measurement (NASA-TLX). User experience was assessed by the USE Questionnaire. RESULTS: For task errors, significant differences were found among ventilators (p<0.05) and the Evital 4 received higher task errors when compared to the Servo I (p<0.05). For blink rate, significant differences were found in tasks of starting the ventilator, ventilator monitoring values recognition, ventilator setting parameters modification, alarm parameter recognition, and resetting among ventilators (p<0.05). Furthermore, blink duration was also found to be significant differently in tasks of starting the ventilator, mode and setting parameters recognition, ventilator monitoring values recognition, ventilator mode modification, and alarm parameter recognition and resetting, as well as in the average of all tasks (p<0.05). For perceived workload, the Evital 4 received higher NASA-TLX scores among ventilators. For user experience, the Servo I received the highest scores on the USE Questionnaire among the ventilators. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides a comprehensive evaluation method of user interface based on respiratory therapists’ performance, workload, and user experience. In addition, this study suggests that the ergonomic design of the Evital 4 is poor. Finally, we found that eye motion (blink rate and duration) may be useful to assess the ergonomics of a user interface. International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2018-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6319161/ /pubmed/30552313 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.911853 Text en © Med Sci Monit, 2018 This work is licensed under Creative Common Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ) |
spellingShingle | Clinical Research Jiang, Mingyin Liu, Shenglin Gao, Jiaqi Feng, Qingmin Zhang, Qiang Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience |
title | Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience |
title_full | Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience |
title_fullStr | Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience |
title_full_unstemmed | Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience |
title_short | Comprehensive Evaluation of User Interface for Ventilators Based on Respiratory Therapists’ Performance, Workload, and User Experience |
title_sort | comprehensive evaluation of user interface for ventilators based on respiratory therapists’ performance, workload, and user experience |
topic | Clinical Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6319161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30552313 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.911853 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jiangmingyin comprehensiveevaluationofuserinterfaceforventilatorsbasedonrespiratorytherapistsperformanceworkloadanduserexperience AT liushenglin comprehensiveevaluationofuserinterfaceforventilatorsbasedonrespiratorytherapistsperformanceworkloadanduserexperience AT gaojiaqi comprehensiveevaluationofuserinterfaceforventilatorsbasedonrespiratorytherapistsperformanceworkloadanduserexperience AT fengqingmin comprehensiveevaluationofuserinterfaceforventilatorsbasedonrespiratorytherapistsperformanceworkloadanduserexperience AT zhangqiang comprehensiveevaluationofuserinterfaceforventilatorsbasedonrespiratorytherapistsperformanceworkloadanduserexperience |