Blood product positive patient identification: comparative simulation-based usability test of two commercial products

BACKGROUND: The blood product administration process has been subject to various quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing errors, including blood product labels that are missing, inaccessible, unreadable, or mismatched to orders and/or patients. This article reports the results of a formal...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 2011-11, Vol.51 (11), p.2311-2318
Hauptverfasser: Anders, Shilo, Miller, Anne, Joseph, Peggy, Fortenberry, Tiercy, Woods, Marcella, Booker, Ray, Slaughter, Jennifer, Weinger, Matthew B., France, Daniel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2318
container_issue 11
container_start_page 2311
container_title Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)
container_volume 51
creator Anders, Shilo
Miller, Anne
Joseph, Peggy
Fortenberry, Tiercy
Woods, Marcella
Booker, Ray
Slaughter, Jennifer
Weinger, Matthew B.
France, Daniel
description BACKGROUND: The blood product administration process has been subject to various quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing errors, including blood product labels that are missing, inaccessible, unreadable, or mismatched to orders and/or patients. This article reports the results of a formal simulation‐based usability test of two comparable technologies designed to reduce blood product administration errors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Nineteen nurses and three anesthesia providers evaluated one of the two products during simulated use in realistic scenarios during 90‐minute test sessions. Both products required additional learning despite 15 minutes of dedicated vendor‐provided pretest training. RESULTS: There were significant effectiveness differences between the two products, but use of both devices was less efficient than manual checking. Usability issues included poor access to subtasks, lack of process feedback, inadequate error messaging, and confusing device interactions. CONCLUSION: While clinicians' subjective ratings of both devices were similarly high, both products had significant usability issues likely to lead to clinician frustration and workarounds during actual use. This study suggests that usability testing is a valuable and more effective method than preference surveys of determining the ability of blood administration products to meet clinicians' needs in the complex world of patient care.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03185.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_900640761</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>900640761</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4365-399d383f18f794c3041fb5d52c537eb2ea226acfddbc4effdf354a8c01abe2763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkEtv1DAUhS0EokPLX0DeIFYJfsRJjMQCKqaAqiKhlnZnOX5IHpxxaid05t_jzEyn23rh53d87j0AQIxKnMfHVYkZbQrCOSsJwrhEFLes3LwAi-PDS7BAqMIFxpScgDcprRBChCP8GpwQzDivm3oBpq8-BA2HGPSkRjiE5Eb3z8BBjs6sR-h0np11Kp_D-hNUoR9klDsmuX7yu_uik8loOCXZOe_GLRxNGmGwcHwIs6Q3UTnpH23SGXhlpU_m7WE9BTfLb9fn34vLXxc_zr9cFqqiNSso55q21OLWNrxSNLdjO6YZUblJ0xEjCamlslp3qjLWaktZJVuFsOwMaWp6Cj7s_83G91OuSfQuKeO9XJswJcERqivU1DiT7Z5UMaQUjRVDdL2MW4GRmDMXKzFHK-ZoxZy52GUuNln67mAydb3RR-FjyBl4fwBkUtLbKNfKpSeOkYoR0mbu8557cN5sn12AuP69nHdZX-z1Lo1mc9TL-FfUDW2YuL26ELd3d-jP8uqnoPQ_z3ev2A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>900640761</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Blood product positive patient identification: comparative simulation-based usability test of two commercial products</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Anders, Shilo ; Miller, Anne ; Joseph, Peggy ; Fortenberry, Tiercy ; Woods, Marcella ; Booker, Ray ; Slaughter, Jennifer ; Weinger, Matthew B. ; France, Daniel</creator><creatorcontrib>Anders, Shilo ; Miller, Anne ; Joseph, Peggy ; Fortenberry, Tiercy ; Woods, Marcella ; Booker, Ray ; Slaughter, Jennifer ; Weinger, Matthew B. ; France, Daniel</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND: The blood product administration process has been subject to various quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing errors, including blood product labels that are missing, inaccessible, unreadable, or mismatched to orders and/or patients. This article reports the results of a formal simulation‐based usability test of two comparable technologies designed to reduce blood product administration errors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Nineteen nurses and three anesthesia providers evaluated one of the two products during simulated use in realistic scenarios during 90‐minute test sessions. Both products required additional learning despite 15 minutes of dedicated vendor‐provided pretest training. RESULTS: There were significant effectiveness differences between the two products, but use of both devices was less efficient than manual checking. Usability issues included poor access to subtasks, lack of process feedback, inadequate error messaging, and confusing device interactions. CONCLUSION: While clinicians' subjective ratings of both devices were similarly high, both products had significant usability issues likely to lead to clinician frustration and workarounds during actual use. This study suggests that usability testing is a valuable and more effective method than preference surveys of determining the ability of blood administration products to meet clinicians' needs in the complex world of patient care.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1132</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03185.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21599676</identifier><identifier>CODEN: TRANAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Biological and medical sciences ; Blood Transfusion ; Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis ; Clinical death. Palliative care. Organ gift and preservation ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medical Errors ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Patient Identification Systems ; Patient Safety ; Transfusion Reaction ; Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy ; User-Computer Interface</subject><ispartof>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2011-11, Vol.51 (11), p.2311-2318</ispartof><rights>2011 American Association of Blood Banks</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>2011 American Association of Blood Banks.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4365-399d383f18f794c3041fb5d52c537eb2ea226acfddbc4effdf354a8c01abe2763</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4365-399d383f18f794c3041fb5d52c537eb2ea226acfddbc4effdf354a8c01abe2763</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1537-2995.2011.03185.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1537-2995.2011.03185.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=25245228$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21599676$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Anders, Shilo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joseph, Peggy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fortenberry, Tiercy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woods, Marcella</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Booker, Ray</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slaughter, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weinger, Matthew B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>France, Daniel</creatorcontrib><title>Blood product positive patient identification: comparative simulation-based usability test of two commercial products</title><title>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</title><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND: The blood product administration process has been subject to various quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing errors, including blood product labels that are missing, inaccessible, unreadable, or mismatched to orders and/or patients. This article reports the results of a formal simulation‐based usability test of two comparable technologies designed to reduce blood product administration errors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Nineteen nurses and three anesthesia providers evaluated one of the two products during simulated use in realistic scenarios during 90‐minute test sessions. Both products required additional learning despite 15 minutes of dedicated vendor‐provided pretest training. RESULTS: There were significant effectiveness differences between the two products, but use of both devices was less efficient than manual checking. Usability issues included poor access to subtasks, lack of process feedback, inadequate error messaging, and confusing device interactions. CONCLUSION: While clinicians' subjective ratings of both devices were similarly high, both products had significant usability issues likely to lead to clinician frustration and workarounds during actual use. This study suggests that usability testing is a valuable and more effective method than preference surveys of determining the ability of blood administration products to meet clinicians' needs in the complex world of patient care.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Blood Transfusion</subject><subject>Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis</subject><subject>Clinical death. Palliative care. Organ gift and preservation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical Errors</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Identification Systems</subject><subject>Patient Safety</subject><subject>Transfusion Reaction</subject><subject>Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy</subject><subject>User-Computer Interface</subject><issn>0041-1132</issn><issn>1537-2995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkEtv1DAUhS0EokPLX0DeIFYJfsRJjMQCKqaAqiKhlnZnOX5IHpxxaid05t_jzEyn23rh53d87j0AQIxKnMfHVYkZbQrCOSsJwrhEFLes3LwAi-PDS7BAqMIFxpScgDcprRBChCP8GpwQzDivm3oBpq8-BA2HGPSkRjiE5Eb3z8BBjs6sR-h0np11Kp_D-hNUoR9klDsmuX7yu_uik8loOCXZOe_GLRxNGmGwcHwIs6Q3UTnpH23SGXhlpU_m7WE9BTfLb9fn34vLXxc_zr9cFqqiNSso55q21OLWNrxSNLdjO6YZUblJ0xEjCamlslp3qjLWaktZJVuFsOwMaWp6Cj7s_83G91OuSfQuKeO9XJswJcERqivU1DiT7Z5UMaQUjRVDdL2MW4GRmDMXKzFHK-ZoxZy52GUuNln67mAydb3RR-FjyBl4fwBkUtLbKNfKpSeOkYoR0mbu8557cN5sn12AuP69nHdZX-z1Lo1mc9TL-FfUDW2YuL26ELd3d-jP8uqnoPQ_z3ev2A</recordid><startdate>201111</startdate><enddate>201111</enddate><creator>Anders, Shilo</creator><creator>Miller, Anne</creator><creator>Joseph, Peggy</creator><creator>Fortenberry, Tiercy</creator><creator>Woods, Marcella</creator><creator>Booker, Ray</creator><creator>Slaughter, Jennifer</creator><creator>Weinger, Matthew B.</creator><creator>France, Daniel</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201111</creationdate><title>Blood product positive patient identification: comparative simulation-based usability test of two commercial products</title><author>Anders, Shilo ; Miller, Anne ; Joseph, Peggy ; Fortenberry, Tiercy ; Woods, Marcella ; Booker, Ray ; Slaughter, Jennifer ; Weinger, Matthew B. ; France, Daniel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4365-399d383f18f794c3041fb5d52c537eb2ea226acfddbc4effdf354a8c01abe2763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Blood Transfusion</topic><topic>Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis</topic><topic>Clinical death. Palliative care. Organ gift and preservation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical Errors</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Identification Systems</topic><topic>Patient Safety</topic><topic>Transfusion Reaction</topic><topic>Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy</topic><topic>User-Computer Interface</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Anders, Shilo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joseph, Peggy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fortenberry, Tiercy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woods, Marcella</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Booker, Ray</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slaughter, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weinger, Matthew B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>France, Daniel</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Anders, Shilo</au><au>Miller, Anne</au><au>Joseph, Peggy</au><au>Fortenberry, Tiercy</au><au>Woods, Marcella</au><au>Booker, Ray</au><au>Slaughter, Jennifer</au><au>Weinger, Matthew B.</au><au>France, Daniel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Blood product positive patient identification: comparative simulation-based usability test of two commercial products</atitle><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><date>2011-11</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>51</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>2311</spage><epage>2318</epage><pages>2311-2318</pages><issn>0041-1132</issn><eissn>1537-2995</eissn><coden>TRANAT</coden><abstract>BACKGROUND: The blood product administration process has been subject to various quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing errors, including blood product labels that are missing, inaccessible, unreadable, or mismatched to orders and/or patients. This article reports the results of a formal simulation‐based usability test of two comparable technologies designed to reduce blood product administration errors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Nineteen nurses and three anesthesia providers evaluated one of the two products during simulated use in realistic scenarios during 90‐minute test sessions. Both products required additional learning despite 15 minutes of dedicated vendor‐provided pretest training. RESULTS: There were significant effectiveness differences between the two products, but use of both devices was less efficient than manual checking. Usability issues included poor access to subtasks, lack of process feedback, inadequate error messaging, and confusing device interactions. CONCLUSION: While clinicians' subjective ratings of both devices were similarly high, both products had significant usability issues likely to lead to clinician frustration and workarounds during actual use. This study suggests that usability testing is a valuable and more effective method than preference surveys of determining the ability of blood administration products to meet clinicians' needs in the complex world of patient care.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><pmid>21599676</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03185.x</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0041-1132
ispartof Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2011-11, Vol.51 (11), p.2311-2318
issn 0041-1132
1537-2995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_900640761
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Adult
Aged
Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy
Biological and medical sciences
Blood Transfusion
Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis
Clinical death. Palliative care. Organ gift and preservation
Female
Humans
Male
Medical Errors
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Patient Identification Systems
Patient Safety
Transfusion Reaction
Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy
User-Computer Interface
title Blood product positive patient identification: comparative simulation-based usability test of two commercial products
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T11%3A55%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Blood%20product%20positive%20patient%20identification:%20comparative%20simulation-based%20usability%20test%20of%20two%20commercial%20products&rft.jtitle=Transfusion%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.)&rft.au=Anders,%20Shilo&rft.date=2011-11&rft.volume=51&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=2311&rft.epage=2318&rft.pages=2311-2318&rft.issn=0041-1132&rft.eissn=1537-2995&rft.coden=TRANAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03185.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E900640761%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=900640761&rft_id=info:pmid/21599676&rfr_iscdi=true