"When the Beeping Stops, you Completely Freak Out" - How Acute Care Teams Experience and Use Technology
Technology use in acute care has so far been studied with a predominant focus on safety and efficiency rather than the experience of acute care staff. In the present paper, we report a qualitative study including 130 hours of participant observation on acute care teams and retrospective interviews w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction 2023-04, Vol.7 (CSCW1), p.1-29, Article 114 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Technology use in acute care has so far been studied with a predominant focus on safety and efficiency rather than the experience of acute care staff. In the present paper, we report a qualitative study including 130 hours of participant observation on acute care teams and retrospective interviews with nine anesthesiologists on their experiences with technology. Our approach is theoretically guided by four modern HCI perspectives, namely psychological need satisfaction, activity theory, embodied interaction, and media equation theory. We analyzed the interview and observation data using a reflexive thematic analysis and identified four themes. Technology as necessary (evil) describes the pervasiveness of technology and how acute care teams depend on technology. While technology as second patient covers the additional load for anesthesiologists on a functional and emotional level, technology as problem solver and safety net highlights relieving aspects of technology use. Technology as artificial limb focuses on so-called transparent tools that extend the body and capabilities of users. We then discuss the identified themes concerning the previously presented theories. Based on our findings and theoretical perspectives, we report general insights for research and design in acute care, such as the benefits of mixed methods or the importance of the gut feelings of experts. Finally, we propose possible directions for future work, such as developing a UX questionnaire adapted to the context of safety-critical domains, such as acute care. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2573-0142 2573-0142 |
DOI: | 10.1145/3579590 |