Nuamah Joseph K, Mosaly Prithima R, Adams Robert, Adapa Kathik, Chera Bhisham S, Marks Lawrence B, Mazur Lukasz M
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
School of Information and Library Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Adv Radiat Oncol. 2020 Sep 28;6(1):100572. doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.09.012. eCollection 2021 Jan-Feb.
This study aimed to assess the effect of monitoring 2 versus 3 collocated displays on radiation therapist technologists' (RTTs) workload (WL) and situation awareness (SA) during routine treatment delivery tasks.
Seven RTTs completed 4 simulated treatment delivery scenarios (2 scenarios per experimental condition; 2 vs 3 collocated displays) in a within-subject experiment. WL was subjectively measured using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index, and objectively measured using eye activity measures. SA was subjectively measured using the SA rating technique, and objectively measured using the SA global assessment technique. Two-tailed paired tests were conducted to test for differences in means when parametric assumptions were satisfied, otherwise Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were conducted. A .05 level of significance was applied to all statistical tests.
No statistically and clinically significant differences were observed between monitoring 2 versus 3 monitors on eye tracking measures (blink rate: 9.4 [4.8] vs 9.6 [4.0]; task evoked pupillary response: 0.16 [0.14] vs 0.21 [0.15]; NASA Task Load Index: 34.7 [19.8] vs 35.3 [20.4]; SA rating technique: 19.3 [6.2] vs 19.5 [7.0]; and SA global assessment technique scores: 100 [0] vs 100 [0]).
Our preliminary findings suggest that monitoring 3 collocated displays by 1 RTT does not impact WL and SA compared with monitoring 2 collocated displays. Only 2 of many possible configurations were investigated. If institutions removed the 3rd display based on the results of this study, there could be unforeseen error(s) if that display helped in situations not assessed in this study.
本研究旨在评估在常规治疗交付任务期间，监测2个与3个并置显示器对放射治疗技师（RTT）的工作量（WL）和态势感知（SA）的影响。
在一项受试者内实验中，7名RTT完成了4个模拟治疗交付场景（每个实验条件2个场景；2个与3个并置显示器）。使用美国国家航空航天局（NASA）任务负荷指数主观测量WL，并使用眼动测量客观测量。使用SA评级技术主观测量SA，并使用SA全局评估技术客观测量。当参数假设满足时，进行双尾配对t检验以检验均值差异，否则进行Wilcoxon符号秩检验。所有统计检验均采用0.05的显著性水平。
在眼动追踪测量方面，监测2个与3个显示器之间未观察到统计学和临床显著差异（眨眼率：9.4[4.8]对9.6[4.0]；任务诱发瞳孔反应：0.16[0.14]对0.21[0.15]；NASA任务负荷指数：34.7[19.8]对35.3[20.4]；SA评级技术：19.3[6.2]对19.5[7.0]；以及SA全局评估技术得分：100[0]对100[0]）。
我们的初步研究结果表明，与监测2个并置显示器相比，1名RTT监测3个并置显示器不会影响WL和SA。仅研究了众多可能配置中的2种。如果机构根据本研究结果移除第三个显示器，那么如果该显示器在本研究未评估的情况下有所帮助，可能会出现不可预见的错误。
