Ergonomic evaluation of an ecological interface and a profilogram display for hemodynamic monitoring.

OBJECTIVE

Comprehensive monitoring of the patient state and subsequent decision making is an essential part of the task of an anaesthetist. The physicians' decision making process is based upon a concept of partly abstract physiologic parameters such as depth of anaesthesia or contractility. This concept is derived from the measured parameters given on todays' trend displays in addition to context information available for the anaesthetist. We investigated two alternative approaches of display design for hemodynamic monitoring: 1) integrated displays based on ecological interface design, and 2) profilogram displays based on intelligent alarms.

METHOD

To evaluate differences in decision making, the two displays and a trend display were compared in an experimental set-up with computer simulated vital parameter curves. From a start state with random parameter deviations from the ideal state, subjects had to achieve the ideal circulatory performance as fast as possible by manipulating vasomotor tone, heart rate, blood volume and contractility. To analyse subjects' decision making process, eye-tracking, event-logging, and the method of think aloud protocols were used. Twenty anaesthesiologists performed 113 experiments (approximately 2 with each display).

RESULTS

The anaesthetists failed to achieve the task in 37% using the trend display, in 19% using the profilogram display, and in 13% using the ecological interface. Hence, a safer task solution was possible with the ecological interface and the profilogram display but at the expense of various performance parameters such as higher trial time, more interactions with the simulated system, and more frequent eye movements. In contrast to the trend display and the profilogram display, where anaesthetists were mainly focussed on controlling the left atrial pressure, such an behaviour was less observed with the ecological interface.

CONCLUSION

Our results have shown that subjects came to more effective solutions with the traditional trend display. The main reason for this result may be their years of experience with this kind of display type. Regarding safe and goal-intended decision finding, the results are encouraging for further experiments with redesigned ecological displays. But these displays ought to have smoother changes with respect to the traditional trend displays. Furthermore, new experiments have to be performed under real or fairly real (e.g. together with an anaesthesia simulator) conditions to underline the positive results for ecological interfaces.