在模拟开班安全检查中进行眼动追踪:对重症监护护士注视行为的观察分析。

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Pub Date : 2024-08-02 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1177/17511437241268160
Yael van der Geest, Ivan Chau, Pedro David Wendel-Garcia, Philipp K Buehler, Wolf Hautz, Miodrag Filipovic, Daniel A Hofmaenner, Urs Pietsch
{"title":"在模拟开班安全检查中进行眼动追踪:对重症监护护士注视行为的观察分析。","authors":"Yael van der Geest, Ivan Chau, Pedro David Wendel-Garcia, Philipp K Buehler, Wolf Hautz, Miodrag Filipovic, Daniel A Hofmaenner, Urs Pietsch","doi":"10.1177/17511437241268160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The handover and associated shift start checks by nurses of critical care patients are complex and prone to errors. However, which aspects lead to errors remains unknown. Fewer errors might occur in a structured approach. We hypothesized that specific gaze behavior during handover and shift start safety check correlates with error recognition.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In our observational eye tracking study, we analyzed gaze behavior of critical care nurses during handover and shift start safety check in a simulation room with built-in errors. Four areas of interest (AOI) were pre-defined (patient, respirator, prescriptions, monitor). The primary outcome were different gaze metrics (time to first fixation, revisits, first visual intake duration, average visual intake duration, dwell time) on AOIs. Parameters were analyzed by taking all errors in account, and by dividing them into minor and critical.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-three participants were included. All participants committed at least a minor error (<i>n</i> = 43, 100%), at least one critical error occurred in 29 participants (67%). Taking all errors into account, longer time to first fixation and more revisits were associated with an increased risk of missing errors (Time to First Fixation: OR 1.099 (95% CI 1.023-1.191, <i>p</i> = 0.0002), Revisits: OR 1.080 (95% CI 1.025-1.143, <i>p</i> = 0.0055)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Error detection during shift start safety check was associated with distinct gaze behavior. Nurses who recognized more errors had a shorter time to first fixation and less revisits. These gaze characteristics might correspond to a more structured approach. Further research is necessary, for example by implementing a checklist, to reduce errors in the future and improve patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":"25 4","pages":"383-390"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11549720/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eye tracking during a simulated start of shift safety check: An observational analysis of gaze behavior of critical care nurses.\",\"authors\":\"Yael van der Geest, Ivan Chau, Pedro David Wendel-Garcia, Philipp K Buehler, Wolf Hautz, Miodrag Filipovic, Daniel A Hofmaenner, Urs Pietsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17511437241268160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The handover and associated shift start checks by nurses of critical care patients are complex and prone to errors. However, which aspects lead to errors remains unknown. Fewer errors might occur in a structured approach. We hypothesized that specific gaze behavior during handover and shift start safety check correlates with error recognition.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In our observational eye tracking study, we analyzed gaze behavior of critical care nurses during handover and shift start safety check in a simulation room with built-in errors. Four areas of interest (AOI) were pre-defined (patient, respirator, prescriptions, monitor). The primary outcome were different gaze metrics (time to first fixation, revisits, first visual intake duration, average visual intake duration, dwell time) on AOIs. Parameters were analyzed by taking all errors in account, and by dividing them into minor and critical.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-three participants were included. All participants committed at least a minor error (<i>n</i> = 43, 100%), at least one critical error occurred in 29 participants (67%). Taking all errors into account, longer time to first fixation and more revisits were associated with an increased risk of missing errors (Time to First Fixation: OR 1.099 (95% CI 1.023-1.191, <i>p</i> = 0.0002), Revisits: OR 1.080 (95% CI 1.025-1.143, <i>p</i> = 0.0055)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Error detection during shift start safety check was associated with distinct gaze behavior. Nurses who recognized more errors had a shorter time to first fixation and less revisits. These gaze characteristics might correspond to a more structured approach. Further research is necessary, for example by implementing a checklist, to reduce errors in the future and improve patient safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Intensive Care Society\",\"volume\":\"25 4\",\"pages\":\"383-390\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11549720/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Intensive Care Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437241268160\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437241268160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:重症监护病人的交接班和相关的护士开班检查非常复杂,而且容易出错。然而,哪些方面会导致失误仍是未知数。结构化的方法可能会减少错误的发生。我们假设,交接班和换班安全检查过程中的特定注视行为与错误识别相关:在我们的眼动追踪观察研究中,我们分析了重症监护护士在有内置错误的模拟室中进行交接班和交班开始安全检查时的注视行为。我们预先设定了四个关注区域(AOI)(患者、呼吸机、处方、监护仪)。主要结果是 AOI 上的不同注视指标(首次固定时间、再次注视、首次视觉摄入持续时间、平均视觉摄入持续时间、停留时间)。分析参数时考虑了所有误差,并将误差分为轻微误差和严重误差:结果:共纳入 43 名参与者。所有参与者至少犯过一次轻微错误(n = 43,100%),29 名参与者(67%)至少犯过一次严重错误。考虑到所有错误,首次定影时间越长、重访次数越多,失误风险越高(首次定影时间:OR 1.099(95%);重访次数:OR 1.099(95%);失误风险:OR 1.099(95%)):OR:1.099 (95% CI 1.023-1.191, p = 0.0002),重访:OR 1.080 (95% CI 1.023-1.191, p = 0.0002):OR 1.080 (95% CI 1.025-1.143, p = 0.0055)):结论:在交接班安全检查中发现错误与不同的注视行为有关。识别出更多错误的护士首次凝视的时间更短,再次凝视的次数更少。这些凝视特征可能与更有条理的方法相对应。有必要开展进一步的研究,例如通过实施检查表来减少未来的错误并提高患者安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Eye tracking during a simulated start of shift safety check: An observational analysis of gaze behavior of critical care nurses.

Background: The handover and associated shift start checks by nurses of critical care patients are complex and prone to errors. However, which aspects lead to errors remains unknown. Fewer errors might occur in a structured approach. We hypothesized that specific gaze behavior during handover and shift start safety check correlates with error recognition.

Methods: In our observational eye tracking study, we analyzed gaze behavior of critical care nurses during handover and shift start safety check in a simulation room with built-in errors. Four areas of interest (AOI) were pre-defined (patient, respirator, prescriptions, monitor). The primary outcome were different gaze metrics (time to first fixation, revisits, first visual intake duration, average visual intake duration, dwell time) on AOIs. Parameters were analyzed by taking all errors in account, and by dividing them into minor and critical.

Results: Forty-three participants were included. All participants committed at least a minor error (n = 43, 100%), at least one critical error occurred in 29 participants (67%). Taking all errors into account, longer time to first fixation and more revisits were associated with an increased risk of missing errors (Time to First Fixation: OR 1.099 (95% CI 1.023-1.191, p = 0.0002), Revisits: OR 1.080 (95% CI 1.025-1.143, p = 0.0055)).

Conclusion: Error detection during shift start safety check was associated with distinct gaze behavior. Nurses who recognized more errors had a shorter time to first fixation and less revisits. These gaze characteristics might correspond to a more structured approach. Further research is necessary, for example by implementing a checklist, to reduce errors in the future and improve patient safety.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Nursing-Critical Care Nursing
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信