skip to main content
10.1145/3489849.3489852acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesvrstConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

opticARe - Augmented Reality Mobile Patient Monitoring in Intensive Care Units

Authors Info & Claims
Published:08 December 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

German Intensive Care Units (ICUs) are in crisis, struggling with an increasing shortage of skilled workers, ultimately putting patients’ safety at risk. To counteract this process, researchers are increasingly concerned with finding digital solutions which aim to support healthcare professionals by enhancing the efficiency of reoccurring critical caring tasks and thus, improve working conditions. In this regard, this paper evaluates the application of Augmented Reality (AR) for patient monitoring for critical care nursing. Grounded on an observational study, semi-structured interviews, as well as a quantitative analysis, mobile patient monitoring scenarios, present particularly during patient transport, were identified as an innovative context of use of AR in the field. Additionally, user requirements such as high wearability, hands-free operability, and clear data representation could be derived from the obtained study results. For validation of these and identification of further requirements, three prototypes differing in their data illustration format were subsequently developed and quantitatively, as well as qualitatively evaluated by conducting an online survey. Thereby, it became evident that future implementations of a corresponding system for patient monitoring ought to integrate a context-dependent data presentation in particular, as this combines high navigability and availability of required data. Identifying patient monitoring during patient transport as a potential context of use, as well as distinguishing a context-dependent design approach as favorable constitute two key contributions of this work and provide a foundation on which future implementations of AR systems in the nursing domain and other related contexts can be established.

References

  1. 2017. HoloAnatomy App Wins Top Honors. https://engineering.case.edu/HoloAnatomy-honors.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2018. Equipment, Devices and Procedures in the Intensive Care Unit: Information for Relatives, Friends and Carers. Technical Report. Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 2019. ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction — Part 210: Human-Centered Design for Interactive Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 2020. Blender. Blender Foundation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 2020. IEC 60601-1:2005+AMD1:2012+AMD2:2020: Medical Electrical Equipment - Part 1: General Requirements for Basic Safety and Essential Performance.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 2020. Mixed Reality Toolkit. Microsoft.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 2020. Unity. Unity Technologies.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 2020. Vuforia Engine. PTC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 2021. Intensive Care Unit Equipment. The Gale Encyclopedia of Surgery and Medical Tests (Feb. 2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Ronald Azuma. 1997. A Survey of Augmented Reality. (1997), 48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Ronald Azuma, Yohan Baillot, Reinhold Behringer, Steven Feiner, Simon Julier, and Blair MacIntyre. 2001. Recent Advances in Augmented Reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 21, 6 (Nov. 2001), 34–47. https://doi.org/10.1109/38.963459Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Heather Bellini, Wei Chen, Masaru Sugiyama, Marcus Shin, Shatel Alam, and Daiki Takayama. 2016. Virtual & Augmented Reality: Understanding the Race for the next Computing Platform.Technical Report 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Yoav Benjamini and Yosef Hochberg. 1995. Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 57, 1 (Jan. 1995), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Ann Blandford. 2013. Semi-Structured Qualitative Studies. In The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction (second ed.), Mads Soegaard and Rikke Friis Dam (Eds.). The Interaction Design Foundation, Aarhus, Denmark.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Karl Blum, Sabine Löffert, Matthias Offermanns, and Petra Steffen. 2019. Krankenhaus Barometer 2019. Technical Report. Deutsches Krankenhausinstitut e. V. (DKI), Düsseldorf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Christoph Bräutigam, Peter Enste, Michaela Evans, Josef Hilbert, Sebastian Merkel, and Öz Fikret. 2017. Digitalisierung im Krankenhaus. Mehr Technik – bessere Arbeit?Study der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung 364. Düsseldorf. 61 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Vanessa Cobus, Steffen Busse, and Wilko Heuten. 2019. Glass++ Evaluating Multimodal Alarms on Google Glass. In Proceedings of Mensch Und Computer 2019 on - MuC’19. ACM Press, Hamburg, Germany, 795–799. https://doi.org/10.1145/3340764.3344910Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Díaz-Oreiro, López, Quesada, and Guerrero. 2019. Standardized Questionnaires for User Experience Evaluation: A Systematic Literature Review. Proceedings 31, 1 (Nov. 2019), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2019031014Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Julian Duhm, Robert Fleischmann, Sein Schmidt, Hagen Hupperts, and Stephan A. Brandt. 2016. Mobile Electronic Medical Records Promote Workflow: Physicians’ Perspective From a Survey. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 4, 2 (June 2016), e5464. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.5464Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Francine Elrose, Andrew Hill, David Liu, Isaac Salisbury, Thien LeCong, Robert G Loeb, and Penelope Sanderson. 2021. The Use of Head-Worn Displays for Vital Sign Monitoring in Critical and Acute Care: Systematic Review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 9, 5 (May 2021), e27165. https://doi.org/10.2196/27165Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Michaela Evans, Volker Hielscher, and Dorothea Voss. 2018. Damit Arbeit 4.0 in der Pflege ankommt. Wie Technik die Pflege stärken kann. Policy Brief 004. Hans-Böckler-Stiftung. 11 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Luisa Flohr, Shaylene Beaudry, K Taneille Johnson, Nicholas West, Catherine M Burns, J Mark Ansermino, Guy A Dumont, David Wensley, Peter Skippen, and Matthias Gorges. 2018. Clinician-Driven Design of VitalPAD –An Intelligent Monitoring and Communication Device to Improve Patient Safety in the Intensive Care Unit. IEEE Journal of Translational Engineering in Health and Medicine 6 (2018), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/JTEHM.2018.2812162Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Milton Friedman. 1937. The Use of Ranks to Avoid the Assumption of Normality Implicit in the Analysis of Variance. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 32, 200 (Dec. 1937), 675–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1937.10503522Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Milton Friedman. 1939. A Correction. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 34, 205 (March 1939), 109–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1939.10502372Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Reed M. Gardner, Terry P. Clemmer, R. Scott Evans, and Roger G. Mark. 2014. Patient Monitoring Systems. In Biomedical Informatics, Edward H. Shortliffe and James J. Cimino (Eds.). Springer London, London, 561–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4474-8_19Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Marc Hassenzahl, Michael Burmester, and Franz Koller. [n.d.]. AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. ([n. d.]), 10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Marc Hassenzahl, Michael Burmester, and Franz Koller. 2008. Der User Experience (UX) Auf Der Spur: Zum Einsatz von Www.Attrakdiff.De. In Usability Professionals 2008, H Brau, S Diefenbach, Marc Hassenzahl, Franz Koller, M Peissner, and K Röse (Eds.). German Chapter der Usability Professionals Association, Stuttgart, 78–82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Uwe Hecker and Christoph Schramm (Eds.). 2018. Praxis des Intensivtransports. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54379-5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Shashivadan P Hirani, Lorna Rixon, Michelle Beynon, Martin Cartwright, Sophie Cleanthous, Abi Selva, Caroline Sanders, and Stanton P Newman. 2017. Quantifying Beliefs Regarding Telehealth: Development of the Whole Systems Demonstrator Service User Technology Acceptability Questionnaire. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 23, 4 (May 2017), 460–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X16649531Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Anna Hogrebe. 01.02.21. Philips Expands Remote Patient Management with the Introduction of Medical Tablet with Advanced Software. https://www.philips.com/a-w/about/news/archive/standard/news/press/2021/20210201-philips-expands-remote-patient-management-with-the-introduction-of-medical-tablet-with-advanced-software.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Michael Isfort, Jonas Hylla, Danny Gehlen, and Daniel Tucman. 2017. Arbeitsbedingungen und -zufriedenheit auf deutschen Intensivstationen. Pflegezeitschrift 70, 5 (May 2017), 46–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41906-017-0064-6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Markus Jelonek and Michael Prilla. 2016. Motivational Aspects of Using Augmented Reality Glasses in Care. (2016). https://doi.org/10.18420/MUC2016-WS02-0004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Henrik Kessler. 2008. Burn-out bei Ärzten und Pflegekräften auf Intensivstationen. Der Anaesthesist 57, 5 (May 2008), 513–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-008-1330-1Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Jayden Khakurel, Jari Porras, Helinä Melkas, and Bo Fu. 2020. A Comprehensive Framework of Usability Issues Related to the Wearable Devices. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 21–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41368-2_2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Kai Klinker, Manuel Wiesche, and Helmut Krcmar. 2019. Digital Transformation in Health Care: Augmented Reality for Hands-Free Service Innovation. Information Systems Frontiers (June 2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09937-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Jan Patrick Kopetz, Daniel Wessel, and Nicole Jochems. 2018. Eignung von Datenbrillen zur Unterstützung von Pflegekräften in der Ausbildung. Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft 72, 1 (March 2018), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41449-017-0072-9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Vanessa Kubek, Sebastian Velten, Frank Eierdanz, and Annette Blaudszun-Lahm (Eds.). 2020. Digitalisierung in der Pflege: Zur Unterstützung einer besseren Arbeitsorganisation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61372-6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Siegfried Lamnek and Claudia Krell. 2016. Qualitative Sozialforschung: mit Online-Material (6., überarbeitete auflage ed.). Beltz, Weinheim Basel.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Reinhard Larsen, Tobias Fink, and Tilmann Müller-Wolff. 2016. Anästhesie und Intensivmedizin für die Fachpflege (9., vollständig überarbeitete auflageed.). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. John W. Mauchly. 1940. Significance Test for Sphericity of a Normal N-Variate Distribution. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 11, 2 (June 1940), 204–209. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177731915Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Seonaidh McDonald. 2005. Studying Actions in Context: A Qualitative Shadowing Method for Organizational Research. Qualitative Research 5, 4 (Nov. 2005), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056923Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Daniel Morrow, Robert North, and Christopher D. Wickens. 2005. Reducing and Mitigating Human Error in Medicine. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics 1, 1 (June 2005), 254–296. https://doi.org/10.1518/155723405783703019Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Changhyun Nam and Young-A Lee. 2020. Validation of the Wearable Acceptability Range Scale for Smart Apparel. Fashion and Textiles 7, 1 (Dec. 2020), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-019-0203-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Keenan A. Pituch and James Stevens. 2016. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS(6th edition ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Akira-Sebastian Poncette, Claudia Spies, Lina Mosch, Monique Schieler, Steffen Weber-Carstens, Henning Krampe, and Felix Balzer. 2019. Clinical Requirements of Future Patient Monitoring in the Intensive Care Unit: Qualitative Study. JMIR Medical Informatics 7, 2 (April 2019), e13064. https://doi.org/10.2196/13064Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Akira-Sebastian Poncette, Claudia Spies, Steffen Weber-Carstens, Monique Schieler, Henning Krampe, Felix Balzer, and Lina Mosch. 2020. Proposal for an Implementation Framework for Digital Health Technology in the Intensive Care Unit: A Qualitative Study. Preprint. In Review. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-40974/v1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Michael Prilla, Heinrich Recken, and Marc Janßen. 2019. Die Pflegebrille – Möglichkeiten Und Barrieren Der Nutzung von Augmented-Reality-Technologie in Der Ambulanten Intensivpflege. In Digitale Transformation von Dienstleistungen Im Gesundheitswesen VI, Mario A. Pfannstiel, Patrick Da-Cruz, and Harald Mehlich(Eds.). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, 281–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25461-2_15Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Carsten Schmitz. [n.d.]. Startseite - LimeSurvey - einfache Online-Umfragen. https://limesurvey.org/de/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Michael Simon. 2018. Von der Unterbesetzung in der Krankenhauspflege zur bedarfsgerechten Personalausstattung: Eine kritische Analyse der aktuellen Reformpläne für die Personalbesetzung im Pflegedienst der Krankenhäuser und Vorstellung zweier Alternativmodelle. Working Paper Forschungsförderung 096. Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. M. Stojanovska, G. Tingle, L. Tan, L. Ulrey, S. Simonson-Shick, J. Mlakar, H. Eastman, R. Gotschall, A. Boscia, R. Enterline, E. Henninger, K. A. Herrmann, S. W. Simpson, M. A. Griswold, and S. Wish-Baratz. 2020. Mixed Reality Anatomy Using Microsoft HoloLens and Cadaveric Dissection: A Comparative Effectiveness Study. Medical Science Educator 30, 1 (March 2020), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00834-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Wolfram Wilhelm. 2013. Basismonitoring und Gefäßzugänge. In Praxis der Intensivmedizin: konkret, kompakt, interdisziplinär, Wolfram Wilhelm (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34433-6_2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Hanna Wüller, Jonathan Behrens, Marcus Garthaus, Sara Marquard, and Hartmut Remmers. 2019. A Scoping Review of Augmented Reality in Nursing. BMC Nursing 18, 1 (Dec. 2019), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-019-0342-2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    VRST '21: Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology
    December 2021
    563 pages
    ISBN:9781450390927
    DOI:10.1145/3489849

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 8 December 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate66of254submissions,26%

    Upcoming Conference

    VRST '24

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format