Vicente K J
Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering ,University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Aug;12(4):291-4. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.4.291.
There is a tendency to assume that medical error can be stamped out by automation. Technology may improve patient safety, but cognitive engineering research findings in several complex safety critical systems, including both aviation and health care, show that more is not always better. Less sophisticated technological systems can sometimes lead to better performance than more sophisticated systems. This "less is more" effect arises because safety critical systems are open systems where unanticipated events are bound to occur. In these contexts, decision support provided by a technological aid will be less than perfect because there will always be situations that the technology cannot accommodate. Designing sophisticated automation that suggests an uncertain course of action seems to encourage people to accept the imperfect advice, even though information to decide independently on a better course of action is available. It may be preferable to create more modest designs that merely provide feedback about the current state of affairs or that critique human generated solutions than to rush to automate by creating sophisticated technological systems that recommend (fallible) courses of action.
人们往往倾向于认为医疗差错可以通过自动化来消除。技术或许能提高患者安全,但包括航空和医疗保健在内的几个复杂安全关键系统的认知工程研究结果表明,更多并不总是更好。不太复杂的技术系统有时能比更复杂的系统带来更好的表现。这种“少即是多”的效应之所以出现,是因为安全关键系统是开放系统,意外事件必然会发生。在这些情况下,技术辅助提供的决策支持并不完美,因为总会存在技术无法适应的情况。设计暗示不确定行动方案的复杂自动化似乎会鼓励人们接受不完善的建议,尽管有可供独立决定更好行动方案的信息。创建更适度的设计,仅仅提供有关当前状况的反馈或对人为生成的解决方案进行批评,可能比急于通过创建推荐(易出错)行动方案的复杂技术系统来实现自动化更为可取。