Comparative usability of manual defibrillators - A human factors study

Area of Science:

• Medical Devices
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Emergency Medicine

Background:

• Manual defibrillators are critical for cardiac arrest resuscitation.
• Improper or slow defibrillator operation can negatively impact patient care.
• Self-explanatory interfaces are crucial for reducing operational errors.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate and compare the usability of four commercially available manual defibrillators.
• To identify how interface design affects operator performance and efficiency.
• To determine which defibrillator offers the best user experience in simulated emergency scenarios.

Main Methods:

• 31 medical students performed 15 tasks on four defibrillators (Lifepak 20e, Defigard Touch 7, Corpuls 3, X-Series).
• Eye-tracking monitored operator gaze, while task completion times and assistance frequency were recorded.
• Subjective usability was assessed using a standardized questionnaire.

Main Results:

• The Lifepak 20e required the fewest assistances and had the shortest task completion times (124 ± 31 s).
• The Zoll X-Series required the most assistances (63) and had the longest completion times (289 ± 85 s).
• Eye-tracking identified interface issues impacting performance; subjective usability ratings correlated with objective measures.

Conclusions:

• Defibrillator usability varies significantly, with task-specific differences observed.
• Interface design directly impacts operator efficiency and perceived usability.
• Addressing usability issues in defibrillator interfaces can enhance operator performance and potentially improve patient outcomes.