GIGA Consciousness, Coma Science Group, University of Liège, Belgium.
Médecine Intensive Réanimation, INSERM CIC 1415, CRICS-TriGGERSep Network, CHRU de Tours and methodS in Patient-centered outcomes and health ResEarch (SPHERE), INSERM UMR 1246, Université de Tours, France.
Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2024 Feb;80:103562. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2023.103562. Epub 2023 Oct 21.
This study aimed to compare the use of a conventional low-tech communication board and a high-tech eye tracking device to improve communication effectiveness of mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care.
A prospective randomized crossover was conducted with a mixed method approach (quantitative primary method and qualitative complementary method) to compare the two technologically opposed communication interfaces.
The mechanically ventilated patients were recruited from the general intensive care unit of the Marie Curie Civil Hospital (Charleroi University Hospital, Belgium).
The communication exchanges were assessed through effectiveness indicators covering the quantity of messages transmitted, success rate, patient satisfaction, communication content and difficulties of use.
The sample consisted of 44 mechanically ventilated patients, covering 88 communication exchanges. The intervention effects on the quantity of messages transmitted (two median messages per exchange for the board versus four median messages per exchange for the eye tracking, p < 0.0001), success rate (80 % for the board versus 100 % for the eye tracking, p < 0.05) and patient satisfaction (66 % "not satisfied", 32 % "satisfied" and 2 % "dissatisfied" for the board versus 52 % "satisfied" and 48 % "very satisfied" for the eye tracking, p < 0.0001) were significant. The communication content covered eight themes for the board compared to nine themes for the eye tracking and the use difficulties included four categories for the board as well as for the eye tracking.
The eye tracking device may further improve communication effectiveness of mechanically ventilated patients compared to the conventional communication board, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
The implementation of high-tech communication devices based on eye tracking in intensive care practice can significantly contribute to patient-centered care by improving communication of mechanically ventilated patients.
本研究旨在比较使用传统的低科技沟通板和高科技眼动追踪设备来提高重症监护机械通气患者的沟通效果。
采用前瞻性随机交叉设计，结合混合方法（定量主要方法和定性补充方法）比较两种技术相反的沟通界面。
机械通气患者从比利时玛丽居里民事医院（沙勒罗瓦大学医院）的普通重症监护病房招募。
通过涵盖传输信息量、成功率、患者满意度、沟通内容和使用难度的有效性指标评估沟通交流。
该样本包括 44 名机械通气患者，共进行了 88 次沟通交流。干预对传输信息量的影响（沟通板每交换两次中位数消息，眼动追踪器每交换四次中位数消息，p<0.0001）、成功率（沟通板为 80%，眼动追踪器为 100%，p<0.05）和患者满意度（沟通板为 66%“不满意”，32%“满意”和 2%“不满意”，眼动追踪器为 52%“满意”和 48%“非常满意”，p<0.0001）有显著差异。沟通内容涵盖沟通板的 8 个主题，而眼动追踪器的 9 个主题，使用困难包括沟通板和眼动追踪器的 4 个类别。
与传统沟通板相比，眼动追踪设备在提高机械通气患者的沟通效果方面可能具有更高的定量和定性效果。
在重症监护实践中实施基于眼动追踪的高科技沟通设备，可以通过改善机械通气患者的沟通，为以患者为中心的护理做出重大贡献。
