Advertisement

Understanding the Dynamics and Temporal Aspects of Work for Human Centered Design

  • Kate SellenEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9734)

Abstract

This paper explores an information theoretic approach to identifying strategies in work practices in dynamic contexts using blood issuing for the operating suite as a case study. Going back to conceptual models of strategies indicated in early human computer interaction work, together with contemporary representation of work practices in dynamic healthcare contexts, the concepts of temporality and pace are explored. This exploration highlights a number of strategies that may be generalizable and could be used to guide inquiry in the early stages of design. Attending to potential general work practice strategies that can arise in response to dynamics and temporal aspects of a particular setting and its conditions, by focusing observations and contextual inquiry for instance, has the potential to avoid idealized conceptions of work practices and inform system design.

Keywords

Human-centred design Task analysis Cognitive systems Workarounds Task representation Temporality 

References

  1. 1.
    Wager, K.A., Lee, F.W., White, A.W.: Life after a disastrous electronic medical record implementation: one clinic’s experience. Ann. Cases Inf. Technol. Appl. Manag. Organ. 3, 153–168 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Freudenheim, M.: Many hospitals resist computerized patient care. The New York Times, C6 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Connolly, C.: Cedars-Sinai doctors cling to pen and paper. The Washington Post, 21 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karsh, B.T.: Beyond usability: designing effective technology implementation systems to promote patient safety. Qual. Saf. Health Care 13(5), 388–394 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karsh, B.T., Brown, R.: Macroergonomics and patient safety: the impact of levels on theory, measurement, analysis and intervention in patient safety research. Appl. Ergon. 41(5), 674–681 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pagliari, C.: Design and evaluation in eHealth: challenges and implications for an interdisciplinary field. J. Med. Internet Res. 9(2), e15 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Laxmisan, A., Hakimzada, F., Sayan, O.R., Green, R.A., Zhang, J., Patel, V.L.: The multitasking clinician: decision-making and cognitive demand during and after team handoffs in emergency care. Int. J. Med. Inform. 76(11), 801–811 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Patel, V.L., Zhang, J., Yoskowitz, N.A., Green, R., Sayan, O.R.: Translational cognition for decision support in critical care environments: a review. J. Biomed. Inform. 41(3), 413–431 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horsky, J., Kaufman, D.R., Oppenheim, M.I., Patel, V.L.: A framework for analyzing the cognitive complexity of computer-assisted clinical ordering. J. Biomed. Inform. 36(1), 4–22 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nemeth, C.P., Kowalsky, J., Brandwijk, M., Kahana, M., Klock, P.A., Cook, R.I.: Before I forget: how clinicians cope with uncertainty through ICU sign-outs. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 939–943. SAGE Publications, Chicago, October 2006Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nemeth, C., Wears, R.L., Patel, S., Rosen, G., Cook, R.: Resilience is not control: healthcare, crisis management, and ICT. Cogn. Technol. Work 13(3), 189–202 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vicente, K.J., Rasmussen, J.: Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 22(4), 589–606 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cornelissen, M., McClure, R., Salmon, P.M., Stanton, N.A.: Validating the strategies analysis diagram: assessing the reliability and validity of a formative method. Appl. Ergon. 45(6), 1484–1494 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ashoori, M., Burns, C.M., d’Entremont, B., Momtahan, K.: Using team cognitive work analysis to reveal healthcare team interactions in a birthing unit. Ergonomics 57(7), 973–986 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dekker, S.W.: Doctors are more dangerous than gun owners: a rejoinder to error counting. Hum. Fact. J. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Soc. 49(2), 177–184 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Woods, D.D.: Behind Human Error. Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Farnham (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin, L., Vicente, K.J., Doyle, D.J.: Patient safety, potential adverse drug events, and medical device design: a human factors engineering approach. J. Biomed. Inform. 34(4), 274–284 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carthey, J., De Leval, M.R., Reason, J.T.: Institutional resilience in healthcare systems. Qual. Health Care 10(1), 29–32 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Beuscart-Zéphir, M.C., Pelayo, S., Bernonville, S.: Example of a human factors engineering approach to a medication administration work system: potential impact on patient safety. Int. J. Med. Inform. 79(4), e43–e57 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sellen, K., Chignel, M.: Pace and temporality in safety critical medical work: concepts for understanding adaptation behaviors. In: Workshop Proceedings, HCI Research in Healthcare: Using Theory from Evidence to Practice. Workshop. International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    O’hara, K., Kjeldskov, J., Paay, J.: Blended interaction spaces for distributed team collaboration. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 18(1), 1–28 (2011). doi: 10.1145/1959022.1959025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reddy, M., Dourish, P.: A finger on the pulse: temporal rhythms and information seeking in medical work. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reddy, M.C., Dourish, P., Pratt, W.: Temporality in medical work: time also matters. Comput. Supported Coop. Work 15(1), 29–53 (2006). doi: 10.1007/s10606-005-9010-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reddy, M.C., Shabot, M.M., Bradner, E.: Evaluating collaborative features of critical care systems: a methodological study of information technology in surgical intensive care units. J. Biomed. Inform. 41(3), 479–487 (2008). doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cheverst, K., Davies, N., Mitchell, K., Friday, A., Efstratiou, C.: Developing a context-aware electronic tourist guide: some issues and experiences. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, The Hague, The Netherlands (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Galani, A., Chalmers, M.: Production of pace as collaborative activity. In: CHI 2004 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vienna, Austria (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mark, G., Voida, S., Cardello, A.: “A pace not dictated by electrons”: an empirical study of work without email. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Austin, Texas, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dix, A.: Pace and interaction. In: Proceedings of the Conference on People and Computers VII, York, United Kingdom (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ontario College of Art and Design UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations