ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2019
A Digital Cognitive Aid for Anesthesia to Support Intraoperative Crisis Management: Results of the User-Centered Design Process.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining Challenges to Co-Design Digital Health Interventions With End Users: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- [Treatment quality with and without an electronic cognitive aid for emergencies in anaesthesia (eGENA) : The DANGER pilot study part 2 in randomized controlled in-situ emergency simulations].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2025Trial
- Implementation of a software-based decision support tool for guideline-appropriate preoperative evaluation: a prospective agreement study.British journal of anaesthesia · 2024Trial
- Usability of a perioperative medication-related clinical decision support software application: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Trial
- Design approaches for developing quality checklists in healthcare organizations: A scoping review.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Getting ON-TRAC, a team-centred design study of a reflexivity aid to support resuscitation teams' information sharing.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2025Article
- Anesthetic-mediated cardioprotection: from molecular mechanisms to clinical translation challenges.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- A Comparative Analysis of the Impact of Two Different Cognitive Aid Bundle Designs on Adherence to Best Clinical Practice in Simulated Perioperative Emergencies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Methods used to evaluate usability of mobile clinical decision support systems for healthcare emergencies: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.JAMIA open · 2023Review
- Correlation between safety attitudes and early adoption of cognitive aids in the German culture sphere: a multicenter survey study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Similarity of expert clinicians' rank order of differential diagnoses in a newborn resuscitation context.Resuscitation plus · 2022Article
- The Application of Human-Centered Design Approaches in Health Research and Innovation: A Narrative Review of Current Practices.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Review
- Development of a Perioperative Medication-Related Clinical Decision Support Tool to Prevent Medication Errors: An Analysis of User Feedback.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Article
- Defining information needs in neonatal resuscitation with work domain analysis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2021Article
- Development and Preliminary Validation of LoAD Calc, a Mobile App for Calculating the Maximum Safe Single Dose of Local Anesthetics.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Investigating Users' and Other Stakeholders' Needs in the Development of a Personalized Integrated Care Platform (PROCare4Life) for Older People with Dementia or Parkinson Disease: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
- A Federated Online Search Tool for Biospecimens (Sample Locator): Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Clinical Decision Support and Implications for the Clinician Burnout Crisis.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2020Review
- Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners.BMC anesthesiology · 2020Article
- Data Model Requirements for a Digital Cognitive Aid for Anesthesia to Support Intraoperative Crisis Management.Applied clinical informatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStressful situations during intraoperative emergencies have negative impact on human cognitive functions. Consequently, task performance may decrease and patient safety may be compromised. Cognitive aids can counteract these effects and support anesthesiologists in their crisis management. The Professional Association of German Anesthesiologists set up a project to develop a comprehensive set of digital cognitive aids for intraoperative emergencies. A parallel development for several software platforms and stationary and mobile devices will accommodate the inhomogeneity of the information technology infrastructure within German anesthesia departments.
objectiveThis paper aimed to provide a detailed overview of how the task of developing a digital cognitive aid for intraoperative crisis management in anesthesia was addressed that meets user requirements and is highly user-friendly.
methodsA user-centered design (UCD) process was conducted to identify, specify, and supplement the requirements for a digital cognitive aid. The study covered 4 aspects: analysis of the context of use, specification of user requirements, development of design solutions, and evaluation of design solutions. Three prototypes were developed and evaluated by end users of the application. Following each evaluation, the new requirements were prioritized and used for redesign. For the first and third prototype, the System Usability Scale (SUS) score was determined. The second prototype was evaluated with an extensive Web-based questionnaire. The evaluation of the third prototype included a think-aloud protocol.
resultsThe chosen methods enabled a comprehensive collection of requirements and helped to improve the design of the application. The first prototype achieved an average SUS score of 74 (SD 12), indicating good usability. The second prototype included the following main revisions: 2-column layout, initial selection of patient type (infant, adult, or parturient), 4 offered search options, and the option to check off completed action steps. Its evaluation identified the following major revision points: add quick selection for resuscitation checklists, design the top bar and tabs slightly larger, and add more pictograms to the text. The third prototype achieved an average SUS score of 77 (SD 15). The evaluation of the think-aloud protocol revealed a good intuitiveness of the application and identified a missing home button as the main issue.
conclusionsAnesthesiology-as an acute medical field-is particularly characterized by its high demands on decision making and action in dynamic, or time-critical situations. The integration of usability aspects is essential for everyday and emergency suitability. The UCD process allowed us to develop a prototypical digital cognitive aid, exhibiting high usability and user satisfaction in the demanding environment of anesthesiological emergencies. Both aspects are essential to increase the acceptance of the application in later stages. The study approach, combining different methods for determining user requirements, may be useful for other implementation projects in a highly demanding environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.