Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2013 Oct-Dec;3(4):e179-86. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2013.02.007. Epub 2013 Apr 22.
To quantitatively assess the difference in workload and performance of radiation oncology physicians during radiation therapy treatment planning tasks under the conditions of "cross coverage" versus planning a patient with whom they were familiar.
Eight physicians (3 experienced faculty physicians and 5 physician residents) performed 2 cases. The first case represented a "cross-coverage" scenario where the physicians had no prior information about the case to be planned. The second exposure represented a "regular-coverage" scenario where the physicians were familiar with the patient case to be planned. Each case involved 3 tasks to be completed systematically. Workload was assessed both subjectively (perceived) using National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), and objectively (physiological) throughout the task using eye data (via monitoring pupil size and blink rate). Performance of each task and the case was measured using completion time. Subjective willingness to approve or disapprove the generated plan was obtained after completion of the case only.
Forty-eight perceived and 48 physiological workload assessments were obtained. Overall, results revealed a significant increase in perceived workload (high NASA-TLX score) and decrease in performance (longer completion time and reduced approval rate) during cross coverage. There were nonsignificant increases in pupil diameter and decreases in the blink rate during cross-coverage versus regular-coverage scenario. In both cross-coverage and regular-coverage scenarios the level of experience did not affect workload and performance.
The cross-coverage scenario significantly increases perceived workload and degrades performance versus regular coverage. Hence, to improve patient safety, efforts must be made to develop policies, standard operating procedures, and usability improvements to electronic medical record and treatment planning systems for "easier" information processing to deal with cross coverage, while recognizing strengths and limitations of human performance.
定量评估在“交叉覆盖”与规划熟悉患者的情况下,放射肿瘤医师在放射治疗计划任务中的工作量和绩效差异。
8 名医师(3 名经验丰富的教职员工和 5 名住院医师)完成了 2 个病例。第一个病例代表“交叉覆盖”情况,医师对要规划的病例没有事先信息。第二个暴露代表“常规覆盖”情况,医师熟悉要规划的患者病例。每个病例涉及 3 个系统完成的任务。使用美国国家航空航天局任务负荷指数(NASA-TLX)进行主观(感知)评估,以及在整个任务过程中通过眼动数据(通过监测瞳孔大小和眨眼率)进行客观(生理)评估来评估工作量。使用完成时间来衡量每个任务和病例的绩效。仅在完成病例后才获得对生成计划的主观批准或不批准的意愿。
共获得 48 次感知工作量和 48 次生理工作量评估。总体而言,结果表明在交叉覆盖期间,感知工作量(高 NASA-TLX 评分)显著增加,而性能(完成时间更长,批准率降低)下降。与常规覆盖相比,在交叉覆盖期间瞳孔直径略有增加,眨眼率略有下降。在交叉覆盖和常规覆盖情况下,经验水平均不会影响工作量和绩效。
与常规覆盖相比,交叉覆盖情况显著增加了感知工作量并降低了性能。因此,为了提高患者安全性,必须努力制定政策、标准操作程序和电子病历和治疗计划系统的可用性改进措施,以更“轻松”地处理交叉覆盖信息,同时认识到人类绩效的优势和局限性。