Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 27, 2025

Non-fluoroscopic Catheter Tracking for Fluoroscopy Reduction in Interventional Electrophysiology
Published on: May 26, 2015
Distractions in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: impact for cardiologists and patient safety
Kalaivani Mahadevan1, Elena Cowan2, Navneet Kalsi3
1Cardiology Department, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Insights
Distractions frequently disrupt invasive cardiac procedures, increasing operator workload. Implementing a
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Human Factors Engineering
- Patient Safety
Background:
- Invasive cardiac procedures are complex and susceptible to disruptions.
- Understanding human factors (HF) is crucial for optimizing procedural safety and efficiency.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the frequency, nature, and impact of distractions during invasive cardiac procedures.
- To assess the operator workload associated with these distractions.
Main Methods:
- Prospective observational study of 194 cardiac procedures in three catheterization laboratories.
- Data collection included distraction characteristics and procedural risk.
- Operator workload was assessed using the NASA task load index.
Main Results:
- Distractions occurred in 55% of procedures, with 80% deemed irrelevant.
- 43 distractions happened during high-risk procedural stages.
- Distractions significantly increased operator mental and physical workload.
Conclusions:
- Fewer than half of procedures were completed without interruption.
- The majority of distractions were non-emergent and unrelated to patient care.
- A 'sterile cockpit' approach is proposed to minimize non-emergent interruptions and enhance patient safety.
Objective:
To understand human factors (HF) contributing to disturbances during invasive cardiac procedures, including frequency and nature of distractions, and assessment of operator workload.
Methods:
Single centre prospective observational evaluation of 194 cardiac procedures in three adult cardiac catheterisation laboratories over 6 weeks. A proforma including frequency, nature, magnitude and level of procedural risk at the time of each distraction/interruption was completed for each case. The primary operator completed a National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) task load questionnaire rating mental/physical effort, level of frustration, time-urgency, and overall effort and performance.
Results:
264 distractions occurred in 106 (55%) out of 194 procedures observed; 80% were not relevant to the case being undertaken; 14% were urgent including discussions of potential ST-elevation myocardial infarction requiring emergency angioplasty. In procedures where distractions were observed, frequency per case ranged from 1 to 16 (mean 2.5, SD ±2.2); 43 were documented during high-risk stages of the procedure. Operator rating of NASA task load parameters demonstrated higher levels of mental and physical workload and effort during cases in which distractions occurred.
Conclusions:
In this first description of HF in adult cardiac catheter laboratories, we found that fewer than half of all procedures were completed without interruption/distraction. The majority were unnecessary and without relation to the case or list. We propose the introduction of a 'sterile cockpit' environment within catheter laboratories, as adapted from aviation and used in surgical operating theatres, to minimise non-emergent interruptions and disturbances, to improve operator conditions and overall patient safety.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview
Cardiac Catheterization IV: Nursing Management
Cardiac Catheterization III: Left Heart Catheterization
Cardiac Catheterization II: Right Heart Catheterization
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care

