Purpose Effective standardization of medical device labels requires objective study of varied designs. Insufficient empirical evidence exists regarding how practitioners utilize and view labeling. Objective Measure the effect of graphic elements (boxing information, grouping information, symbol use and color-coding) to optimize a label for comparison with those typical of commercial medical devices. Design Participants viewed 54 trials on a computer screen. Trials were comprised of two labels that were identical with regard to graphics, but differed in one aspect of information (e.g., one had latex, the other did not). Participants were instructed to select the label along a given criteria (e.g., latex containing) as quickly as possible. Dependent variables were binary (correct selection) and continuous (time to correct selection). Participants Eighty-nine healthcare professionals were recruited at Association of Surgical Technologists (AST) conferences, and using a targeted e-mail of AST members. Results Symbol presence, color coding and grouping critical pieces of information all significantly improved selection rates and sped time to correct selection (α = 0.05). Conversely, when critical information was graphically boxed, probability of correct selection and time to selection were impaired (α = 0.05). Subsequently, responses from trials containing optimal treatments (color coded, critical information grouped with symbols) were compared to two labels created based on a review of those commercially available. Optimal labels yielded a significant positive benefit regarding the probability of correct choice ((P<0.0001) LSM; UCL, LCL: 97.3%; 98.4%, 95.5%)), as compared to the two labels we created based on commercial designs (92.0%; 94.7%, 87.9% and 89.8%; 93.0%, 85.3%) and time to selection. Conclusions Our study provides data regarding design factors, namely: color coding, symbol use and grouping of critical information that can be used to significantly enhance the performance of medical device labels.
[1]
Ganesh N. Sharma,et al.
NEED FOR HARMONIZATION OF LABELING OF MEDICAL DEVICES: A REVIEW
,
2010,
Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research.
[2]
S. Small,et al.
Medical device-associated safety and risk: surveillance and stratagems.
,
2004,
JAMA.
[3]
G Gregory Raab,et al.
From medical invention to clinical practice: the reimbursement challenge facing new device procedures and technology--part 1: issues in medical device assessment.
,
2006,
Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.
[4]
G. Norton.
A Systematic Review and Analysis of Leading Practices in Canada with Reference to Key Initiatives Elsewhere
,
2002
.
[5]
C. Marano,et al.
To err is human. Building a safer health system
,
2005
.
[6]
C. L. Ventola.
Challenges in evaluating and standardizing medical devices in health care facilities.
,
2008,
P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management.
[7]
L. Burns.
Growth And Innovation In Medical Devices: A Conversation With Stryker Chairman John Brown
,
2007
.
[8]
Danielle Devenio.
Visual language can enhance medical device labeling.
,
2013,
Biomedical instrumentation & technology.