Evaluation of the user-friendliness of seven new generation intensive care ventilators

ObjectiveTo explore the user-friendliness and ergonomics of seven new generation intensive care ventilators.DesignProspective task-performing study.SettingIntensive care research laboratory, university hospital.MethodsTen physicians experienced in mechanical ventilation, but without prior knowledge of the ventilators, were asked to perform eight specific tasks [turning the ventilator on; recognizing mode and parameters; recognizing and setting alarms; mode change; finding and activating the pre-oxygenation function; pressure support setting; stand-by; finding and activating non-invasive ventilation (NIV) mode]. The time needed for each task was compared to a reference time (by trained physiotherapist familiar with the devices). A time >180 s was considered a task failure.ResultsFor each of the tests on the ventilators, all physicians’ times were significantly higher than the reference time (P < 0.001). A mean of 13 ± 8 task failures (16%) was observed by the ventilator. The most frequently failed tasks were mode and parameter recognition, starting pressure support and finding the NIV mode. Least often failed tasks were turning on the pre-oxygenation function and alarm recognition and management. Overall, there was substantial heterogeneity between machines, some exhibiting better user-friendliness than others for certain tasks, but no ventilator was clearly better that the others on all points tested.ConclusionsThe present study adds to the available literature outlining the ergonomic shortcomings of mechanical ventilators. These results suggest that closer ties between end-users and manufacturers should be promoted, at an early development phase of these machines, based on the scientific evaluation of the cognitive processes involved by users in the clinical setting.

[1]  Vimla L. Patel,et al.  Using usability heuristics to evaluate patient safety of medical devices , 2003, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[2]  Jean-Blaise Wasserfallen,et al.  Human errors in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit: a 1-year prospective study , 2001, Intensive Care Medicine.

[3]  J R Wilson,et al.  Fundamentals of ergonomics in theory and practice. , 2000, Applied ergonomics.

[4]  Philippe Jolliet,et al.  Performance of noninvasive ventilation modes on ICU ventilators during pressure support: a bench model study , 2007, Intensive Care Medicine.

[5]  P Buckle,et al.  Patient safety, systems design and ergonomics. , 2006, Applied ergonomics.

[6]  T. Similowski,et al.  Evaluation of the user-friendliness of 11 home mechanical ventilators , 2006, European Respiratory Journal.

[7]  D. Bates,et al.  The Critical Care Safety Study: The incidence and nature of adverse events and serious medical errors in intensive care* , 2005, Critical care medicine.

[8]  Y. Donchin,et al.  A look into the nature and causes of human errors in the intensive care unit , 2022 .

[9]  Masayuki Suzukawa,et al.  Evaluation of the user interface simplicity in the modern generation of mechanical ventilators. , 2008, Respiratory care.

[10]  S. Mackenzie,et al.  Critical incidents in the intensive therapy unit , 1991, The Lancet.

[11]  Vimla L. Patel,et al.  To err is not entirely human: Complex technology and user cognition , 2005, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[12]  Karin Garmer,et al.  Application of usability testing to the development of medical equipment. Usability testing of a frequently used infusion pump and a new user interface for an infusion pump developed with a Human Factors approach , 2002 .

[13]  David D. Woods,et al.  Users as Designers: How People Cope with Poor HCI Design in Computer-Based Medical Devices , 1994, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Karin Garmer,et al.  User participation in requirements elicitation comparing focus group interviews and usability tests for eliciting usability requirements for medical equipment: a case study , 2004 .

[15]  Elizabeth Murphy,et al.  Medical device development: the challenge for ergonomics. , 2008, Applied ergonomics.

[16]  Preventing ventilator-related deaths and injuries. , 2002, Sentinel event alert.

[17]  S. Chevret,et al.  Iatrogenic complications in adult intensive care units: A prospective two‐center study , 1993, Critical care medicine.

[18]  Kathleen Grace.  The ventilator: selection of mechanical ventilators. , 1998, Critical care clinics.

[19]  S. Jaber,et al.  Performance characteristics of 10 home mechanical ventilators in pressure-support mode: a comparative bench study. , 2005, Chest.

[20]  Vimla L. Patel,et al.  A cognitive taxonomy of medical errors , 2004, J. Biomed. Informatics.