Visual cueing with context relevant information for reducing change blindness

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 223-232

  Tappan, Jacqueline M ^a   Daniels, Jeremy ^b   Slavin, Brad ^b   Lim, Joanne ^b   Brant, Rollin ^c   Ansermino, J Mark ^b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b BC CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Change blindness; Context relevant information; Physiological monitoring; Visual cues; Visual display

Indexed keywords

CHANGE BLINDNESS; CONTEXT RELEVANT INFORMATION; PHYSIOLOGICAL MONITORING; VISUAL CUES; VISUAL DISPLAY;

EYE PROTECTION; PATIENT MONITORING;

PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS;

ANESTHESIA MECHANISM; ARTICLE; BLINDNESS; CONTEXT RELEVANT INFORMATION; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; HUMAN; MONITORING; PHYSIOLOGICAL MONITORING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECOGNITION; SIGNAL DETECTION; VISION; VISUAL INFORMATION;

ANESTHESIA; ANESTHESIOLOGY; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MONITORING, INTRAOPERATIVE; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; REACTION TIME; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 68349144708     PISSN: 13871307     EISSN: 15732614     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10877-009-9186-8     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Weinger MB. Vigilance, boredom, and sleepiness. J Clin Monit Comput. 1999;15:549-52.
2. Weinger MB, Englund CE. Ergonomic and human factors affecting anesthetic vigilance and monitoring performance in the operating room environment. Anesthesiology. 1990;73:995-1021.
3. Simons DJ, Ambinder MS. Change blindness: Theory and consequences. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2005;14:44-8.
4. Gaba DM. Human performance issues in anaesthesia patient safety. Probl Anesth. 1991;5:329-50.
5. Drews FA, Westenskow DR. Display design in anesthesia. Hum Factors. 2006;48:59-71.
6. Rensink RA, O'Regan JK, Clark JJ. To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychol Sci. 1997;8:368-73.
7. Hitchcock EM, Dember WN, Warm JS, Moroney BW, See JE. Effects of cueing and knowledge results on workload and boredom in sustained attention. Hum Factors. 1999;41:365-72.
8. Warm JS, Dember WN, Hancock PA. Automation and human performance: Theory and applications. In: Parasuraman R, Mouloua M, editors. Vigilance and workload in automated systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1996. p. 183-200.
9. Yang P, Dumont G, Ansermino JM. Adaptive change detection in heart rate monitoring in anesthetized children. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2006;53:2211-9.
10. Ansermino JM, Daniels JP, Hewgill RT, Lim J, Yang P, Brouse CJ, et al. An evaluation of a novel software tool for detecting changes in physiological monitoring. Anesth Analg. 2009;108:873-80.
11. Spinuzzi C. The methodology of participatory design. Tech Commun. 2005;52:163-74.
12. Lewis J. IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 1995;7:57-78.
13. Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Walker GH, Baber C, Jenkins DP. Human factors methods: A practical guide for engineering and design. Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited; 2005.
14. Ford S, Daniels J, Lim J, Koval V, Dumont GA, Schwarz SK, et al. A novel vibrotactile display to improve the performance of anesthesiologists in a simulated critical incident. Anesth Analg. 2008;106:1182-8.
15. Laird NM, Ware JH. Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics. 1982;38:963-74.
16. Zeger SL, Liang KY. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics. 1986;42:121-30.
17. Sigurdson K, Ayas NT. The public health and safety consequences of sleep disorders. Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 2007;85:179-83.
18. Fayyad U, Grinstein GG, Wierse A. Information visualization in data mining and knowledge discovery. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 2001.
19. Cooper JB, Newbower RS, Kitz RJ. An analysis of major errors and equipment failures in anesthesia management: Considerations for prevention and detection. Anesthesiology. 1984;60:34-42.
20. Tinker JH, Dull DL, Caplan RA, Ward RJ, Cheney FW. Role of monitoring devices in prevention of anesthetic mishaps: A closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 1989;71:541-6.
21. Jungk A, Thull B, Hoeft A, Rau G. Evaluation of two new ecological approaches for the anesthesia workplace. J Clin Monit Comput. 2000;16:243-58.
22. Burns CM, Hajdukiewicz JR. Ecological interface design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2004.
23. Watson MO, Sanderson PM. Designing for attention with sound: Challenges and extensions to ecological interface design. Hum Factors. 2007;49:331-46.
24. McIntyre J. Ergonomics: Anaesthetists' use of auditory alarms in the operating room. Int J Clin Monit Comput. 1985;2:47-55.
25. Finley GA, Cohen AJ. Perceived urgency and the anaesthetist: Responses to common operating room monitor alarms. Can J Anaesth. 1991;38:958-64.
26. Birmingham E, Ford S, Lim J, Ansermino JM. How often do anesthesiologists really check their monitors? Can J Anaesth. 2007;54:44522.
27. Matthews G, Davies DR, Westerman SJ, Stammers RB. Human performance: cognition, stress and individual differences. Hove, Sussex: Psychology Press; 2000.
28. Simons DJ, Rensink RA. Change blindness: Past, present, and future. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005;9:16-20.
29. Breslow MJ, Rosenfeld BA, Doerfler M, Burke G, Yates G, Stone GJ, et al. Effect of a multiple-site intensive care unit telemedicine program on clinical and economic outcomes: An alternative paradigm for intensivist staffing. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:31-8.