Abstract 141: Comparative Usability of Defibrillator User Interfaces
Background and Objectives:
In-hospital cardiac arrest continues to be a major public health problem with much room for improvement in survival. Systems and equipment related issues have recently been cited as a significant contributor to the suboptimal outcomes of resuscitation management. It is also known that knowledge and skill decay occur much more rapidly than can be refreshed during biannual certification in advanced cardiac life support programs. As part of a regional purchasing plan for new defibrillators, a systematic evaluation of the human-device interface was undertaken to evaluate the intuitive nature of each competing device that met minimum equipment specifications.
61 multidisciplinary staff nurses, physicians, and biomedical engineers voluntarily participated in this IRB approved project at 6 different hospitals. A focused observational technique combined with structured usability timed performance was conducted in a private area in clinical units. The devices tested were the Physio-Control LifePak 15, Zoll R Series Plus, and the Philips MRx. Staff received no training prior to their interactions with the devices; however, all staff were currently certified in advanced cardiac life support.
There were significant differences in the usability of the devices based on time performance for each critical function_AED use, manual defibrillation of VT/VF, synchronized cardioversion of narrow complex tachycardia, and transcutaneous pacing of complete heart block. There were also difference among the devices in perceived weight, portability for transport, and durability.
Each of the devices tested has positive and negative attributes that need to be considered when selecting new critical equipment. The considerations should include the demographics of the end-users as well as the systems needs that are to be met when selecting in-hospital defibrillators.
- © 2012 by American Heart Association, Inc.