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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 2011-11, Vol.51 (11), p.2311-2318 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
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&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 |