skip to main content
10.1145/3491101.3519745acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Supporting Anaesthetists during ‘Red Blanket’ Trauma Surgery: An Analysis of Work Practices and Requirements for a Head-Worn Display Support System

Authors Info & Claims
Published:28 April 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

‘Red blanket’ (RB) processes accelerate the surgical treatment of patients who have suffered severe trauma. Although the rapid start of surgery has positive effects on patient outcomes, the short time available to prepare for a case and the limited information available at the outset of care can be challenging for physicians. To support the lead of an RB team in making the right clinical decisions quickly, this work proposes a head-worn display (HWD) based information system. HWD could be valuable in RB settings, because they provide information in a continuous and hands-free manner, potentially allowing physicians to access case relevant data while treating the patient. Through an interview study with seven anaesthetists, we studied work practices of RB team leads and identified user requirements for the HWD based support system. We discuss opportunities and challenges for HWDs in RB settings and provide a detailed description of the developed HWD application.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. ATLS Subcommittee, American College of Surgeons’ Committee on Trauma, and International ATLS working group. 2013. Advanced trauma life support (ATLS®): the ninth edition. The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 74, 5: 1363–1366. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e31828b82f5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Michael Bernhard, Torben K. Becker, Tim Nowe, Marko Mohorovicic, Marcus Sikinger, Thorsten Brenner, Goetz M. Richter, Boris Radeleff, Peter-Jürgen Meeder, Markus W. Büchler, Bernd W. Böttiger, Eike Martin, and André Gries. 2007. Introduction of a treatment algorithm can improve the early management of emergency patients in the resuscitation room. Resuscitation 73, 3: 362–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2006.09.014Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2: 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology 18, 3: 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Ozan Cakmakci and Jannick Rolland. 2006. Head-Worn Displays: A Review. Journal of Display Technology 2, 3: 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1109/jdt.2006.879846Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. John R. Clarke, Stanley Z. Trooskin, Prashant J. Doshi, Lloyd Greenwald, and Charles J. Mode. 2002. Time to Laparotomy for Intra-abdominal Bleeding from Trauma Does Affect Survival for Delays Up to 90 Minutes. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 52, 3: 420–425.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Giana H Davidson, Ronald V Maier, Saman Arbabi, Adam B Goldin, and Frederick P Rivara. 2012. Impact of Operative Intervention Delay on Pediatric Trauma Outcomes. The journal of trauma and acute care surgery 73, 1: 162–167. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e31825699b4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Thomas J. Davidson and Penelope M. Sanderson. 2021. A Review of the Effects of Head-Worn Displays on Teamwork for Emergency Response. Ergonomics 0, ja: 1–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2021.1968041Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Bryn Dougherty and M. Sherif Badawy. 2017. Using Google Glass in Nonsurgical Medical Settings: Systematic Review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 5, 10: e159. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.8671Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Mark Fitzgerald, Peter Cameron, Colin Mackenzie, Nathan Farrow, Pamela Scicluna, Robert Gocentas, Adam Bystrzycki, Geraldine Lee, O'Reilly Gerard, Nick Andrianopoulos, Linas Dziukas, D. Jamie Cooper, Andrew Silvers, Alfredo Mori, Angela Murray, Susan Smith, Yan Xiao, Dion Stub, Frank T. McDermott, and Jeffrey V. Rosenfeld. 2011. Trauma Resuscitation Errors and Computer-Assisted Decision Support. Archives of Surgery 146, 2: 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2010.333Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Tobias Grundgeiger, Felix Hahn, Thomas Wurmb, and Oliver Happel. 2020. A Cognitive Aid to Support In-hospital Resuscitation Teams: An Experimental Evaluation in a Medical Simulation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 64, 1: 669–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181320641153Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Swathi Jagannath, Aleksandra Sarcevic, and Andrea Forte. 2018. “We Are Not Entirely Replacing Paper”: Understanding Paper Persistence in Emergency Medical Settings. In Companion of the 2018 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW ’18), 249–252. https://doi.org/10.1145/3272973.3274067Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Sara Klueber, Erik Wolf, Tobias Grundgeiger, Birgit Brecknell, Ismail Mohamed, and Penelope Sanderson. 2019. Supporting multiple patient monitoring with head-worn displays and spearcons. Applied Ergonomics 78: 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.01.009Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Jeremias Kuge, Tobias Grundgeiger, Paul Schlosser, Penelope Sanderson, and Oliver Happel. 2021. Design and Evaluation of a Head-Worn Display Application for Multi-Patient Monitoring. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021, 879–890. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462011Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Diana S. Kusunoki and Aleksandra Sarcevic. 2015. Designing for Temporal Awareness: The Role of Temporality in Time-Critical Medical Teamwork. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW ’15), 1465–1476. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675279Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. C. M. Lamb, P. MacGoey, A. P. Navarro, and A. J. Brooks. 2014. Damage control surgery in the era of damage control resuscitation. British Journal of Anaesthesia 113, 2: 242–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeu233Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. M. F. Rotondo, C. W. Schwab, M. D. McGonigal, GR 3rd Phillips, T. M. Fruchterman, D. R. Kauder, B. A. Latenser, and P. A. Angood. 1993. “Damage control”: an approach for improved survival in exsanguinating penetrating abdominal injury. The Journal of trauma 35, 3: 375–383.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Aleksandra Sarcevic. 2010. “Who's scribing?”: documenting patient encounter during trauma resuscitation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’10), 1899–1908. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753611Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Aleksandra Sarcevic and Randall S. Burd. 2008. “What's the Story?” Information Needs of Trauma Teams. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings 2008: 641–645.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Aleksandra Sarcevic, Ivan Marsic, Michael E. Lesk, and Randall S. Burd. 2008. Transactive memory in trauma resuscitation. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW ’08), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1145/1460563.1460597Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Paul D. Schlosser, Tobias Grundgeiger, Penelope M. Sanderson, and Oliver Happel. 2019. An exploratory clinical evaluation of a head-worn display based multiple-patient monitoring application: impact on supervising anesthesiologists’ situation awareness. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 33, 6: 1119–1127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-019-00265-4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Paul D. Schlosser, Ben Matthews, and Penelope M. Sanderson. 2021. Head-worn displays for healthcare and industry workers: A review of applications and design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 154: 102628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102628Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Paul Schlosser, Tobias Grundgeiger, and Oliver Happel. 2018. Multiple Patient Monitoring in the Operating Room using a Head-Mounted Display. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188460Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Arnvør á Torkilsheyggi and Morten Hertzum. 2015. Visible but Unseen? A Workplace Study of Blood-Test Icons on Electronic Emergency-Department Whiteboards. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW ’15), 798–807. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675228Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Nancy J. Wei, Bryn Dougherty, Aundria Myers, and Sherif M. Badawy. 2018. Using Google Glass in Surgical Settings: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 6, 3: e54. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.9409Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Leslie Wu, Jesse Cirimele, Jonathan Bassen, Kristen Leach, Stuart Card, Larry Chu, Kyle Harrison, and Scott Klemmer. 2013. Head-mounted and multi-surface displays support emergency medical teams. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work companion (CSCW ’13), 279–282. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441955.2442020Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

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
    CHI EA '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 2022
    3066 pages
    ISBN:9781450391566
    DOI:10.1145/3491101

    Copyright © 2022 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 the author(s) 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: 28 April 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • poster
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

    Upcoming Conference

    CHI '24
    CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    May 11 - 16, 2024
    Honolulu , HI , USA

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