Observational studyBMJ open quality2026
Interruptions and multitasking in anaesthesia nursing: a prospective observational study of cognitive strain and workflow patterns.
Observational study in BMJ open quality, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn critical fields such as anaesthesiology, maintaining uninterrupted focus during key procedures, particularly during critical phases of anaesthesia care, such as induction and extubation, is crucial for patient safety. Multitasking and interruptions in healthcare settings have been linked to increased error rates and reduced efficiency. This study comprises two parts: (1) an objective observational analysis of multitasking and interruptions and (2) an exploratory examination of their relationship to perceived work-related stress, perceived error risk and job satisfaction.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, 19 anaesthesia nurses at the University Hospital in Würzburg were observed during 30 field sessions. The study used the Work Observation Method by Activity Timing application for real-time recording and classification of tasks into primary activities (core clinical tasks), secondary activities (parallel tasks, ie, multitasking) and interruptions (externally triggered interruptions leading to task cessation). Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were calculated to examine associations between observational data and subjective ratings.
resultsInterruptions accounted for 4% of the total observation time, with secondary activities being performed during 8.5% of the time. The average duration of interruptions was 36 s. Primary activities constituted 74.36% of all tasks, with communication-related interruptions being the most frequent. Preparatory work comprised more than half of the total duration of primary activities. Communication tasks were the dominant event during secondary activities, with a significant number of steps associated with them. On a subjective level, a strong positive correlation was found between perceived stress and error potential.
conclusionsInterruptions and secondary activities were common in anaesthesia nursing workflows but accounted for only a small proportion of total working time. Most interruptions involved communication required for perioperative coordination. Step-based movement estimates showed substantial physical workload, with walking activity unevenly distributed across task categories and predominantly occurring during primary activities.
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.