Department of Computer Science and Technology, University of Bedfordshire, Park Square, Luton, UK.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2011 Feb 28;11:15. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-11-15.
Academic literature and international standards bodies suggest that user involvement, via the incorporation of human factors engineering methods within the medical device design and development (MDDD) process, offer many benefits that enable the development of safer and more usable medical devices that are better suited to users' needs. However, little research has been carried out to explore medical device manufacturers' beliefs and attitudes towards user involvement within this process, or indeed what value they believe can be added by doing so.
In-depth interviews with representatives from 11 medical device manufacturers are carried out. We ask them to specify who they believe the intended users of the device to be, who they consult to inform the MDDD process, what role they believe the user plays within this process, and what value (if any) they believe users add. Thematic analysis is used to analyse the fully transcribed interview data, to gain insight into medical device manufacturers' beliefs and attitudes towards user involvement within the MDDD process.
A number of high-level themes emerged, relating who the user is perceived to be, the methods used, the perceived value and barriers to user involvement, and the nature of user contributions. The findings reveal that despite standards agencies and academic literature offering strong support for the employment formal methods, manufacturers are still hesitant due to a range of factors including: perceived barriers to obtaining ethical approval; the speed at which such activity may be carried out; the belief that there is no need given the 'all-knowing' nature of senior health care staff and clinical champions; a belief that effective results are achievable by consulting a minimal number of champions. Furthermore, less senior health care practitioners and patients were rarely seen as being able to provide valuable input into the process.
Medical device manufacturers often do not see the benefit of employing formal human factors engineering methods within the MDDD process. Research is required to better understand the day-to-day requirements of manufacturers within this sector. The development of new or adapted methods may be required if user involvement is to be fully realised.
学术文献和国际标准机构表明,通过在医疗器械设计和开发(MDDD)过程中纳入人为因素工程方法,让用户参与其中,可以带来许多益处,从而开发出更安全、更易用且更符合用户需求的医疗器械。然而,很少有研究探讨医疗器械制造商在这一过程中对用户参与的信念和态度,或者他们认为这样做可以增加什么价值。
对 11 家医疗器械制造商的代表进行深入访谈。我们请他们指定他们认为设备的预期使用者是谁,他们咨询谁来为 MDDD 过程提供信息,他们认为用户在这个过程中扮演什么角色,以及他们认为用户有什么价值(如果有的话)。使用主题分析对完整转录的访谈数据进行分析,以深入了解医疗器械制造商在 MDDD 过程中对用户参与的信念和态度。
出现了一些与谁被认为是用户、使用的方法、感知价值和用户参与的障碍以及用户贡献的性质相关的高级主题。研究结果表明,尽管标准机构和学术文献强烈支持采用正式方法,但由于一系列因素,制造商仍然犹豫不决,包括:获得伦理批准的感知障碍;开展此类活动的速度;认为由于高级医疗保健人员和临床拥护者的“无所不知”性质,没有必要;相信通过咨询少数拥护者就可以取得有效的成果。此外,很少有低级别的医疗保健从业者和患者被认为能够为这一过程提供有价值的投入。
医疗器械制造商通常不认为在 MDDD 过程中采用正式的人为因素工程方法有好处。需要进行研究以更好地了解该领域制造商的日常需求。如果要充分实现用户参与,则可能需要开发新的或经过改编的方法。