A Digital Cognitive Aid for Anesthesia to Support Intraoperative Crisis Management: Results of the User-Centered Design Process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stressful situations during intraoperative emergencies have negative impact on human cognitive functions. Consequently, task performance may decrease and patient safety may be compromised. Cognitive aids can counteract these effects and support anesthesiologists in their crisis management. The Professional Association of German Anesthesiologists set up a project to develop a comprehensive set of digital cognitive aids for intraoperative emergencies. A parallel development for several software platforms and stationary and mobile devices will accommodate the inhomogeneity of the information technology infrastructure within German anesthesia departments. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to provide a detailed overview of how the task of developing a digital cognitive aid for intraoperative crisis management in anesthesia was addressed that meets user requirements and is highly user-friendly. METHODS: A user-centered design (UCD) process was conducted to identify, specify, and supplement the requirements for a digital cognitive aid. The study covered 4 aspects: analysis of the context of use, specification of user requirements, development of design solutions, and evaluation of design solutions. Three prototypes were developed and evaluated by end users of the application. Following each evaluation, the new requirements were prioritized and used for redesign. For the first and third prototype, the System Usability Scale (SUS) score was determined. The second prototype was evaluated with an extensive Web-based questionnaire. The evaluation of the third prototype included a think-aloud protocol. RESULTS: The chosen methods enabled a comprehensive collection of requirements and helped to improve the design of the application. The first prototype achieved an average SUS score of 74 (SD 12), indicating good usability. The second prototype included the following main revisions: 2-column layout, initial selection of patient type (infant, adult, or parturient), 4 offered search options, and the option to check off completed action steps. Its evaluation identified the following major revision points: add quick selection for resuscitation checklists, design the top bar and tabs slightly larger, and add more pictograms to the text. The third prototype achieved an average SUS score of 77 (SD 15). The evaluation of the think-aloud protocol revealed a good intuitiveness of the application and identified a missing home button as the main issue. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiology-as an acute medical field-is particularly characterized by its high demands on decision making and action in dynamic, or time-critical situations. The integration of usability aspects is essential for everyday and emergency suitability. The UCD process allowed us to develop a prototypical digital cognitive aid, exhibiting high usability and user satisfaction in the demanding environment of anesthesiological emergencies. Both aspects are essential to increase the acceptance of the application in later stages. The study approach, combining different methods for determining user requirements, may be useful for other implementation projects in a highly demanding environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it