Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

, Volume 18, Issue 5–6, pp 365–372 | Cite as

Usability Evaluation of a Gui Prototype for a Ventilator Machine

  • Yuanhua Liu
  • Lic. Tech.
  • Anna-Lisa Osvalder


Objective. Information presentation on the monitor screen of ventilator machines affects nurses’ response and decision-making during ventilation treatment. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a new GUI (graphical user interface) prototype, the so-called circular display prototype can make deviations easy to detect. Method. A numerical display prototype was made and used as a reference display in the evaluation. Six task scenarios that involved parameter changes were selected to simulate a real situation under volume control (VC) mode during ventilation treatment. Usability tests with the two display designs were carried out in a usability laboratory. Twenty medical nursing students participated as test subjects in the usability tests. Results. The objective results showed that the graphical circular display had an advantage over the numerical display in interpreting parameter changes, but not in reducing the error rates for detecting the number of parameter changes or for forming an overall picture of the patient’s situation. Furthermore, the circular display prototype did not improve the detection time. Conclusions. Although the majority of the test subjects preferred the graphical circular display, the results implied that several aspects of this prototype should be improved in a future development study.


Graphical circular display numerical display prototype usability tests deviation detection 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gaba D. Human error in dynamic medical domains. In: Human error in medicine. 1994; 197–224.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    George TB, Stephen DS, Kate W. A graphical object display improves anesthesiologists’ performance on a simulated diagnostic task. J Clin Monit 1999; 15: 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gurushanthaiah K, Weinger MB, Englund CE. Visual display format affects the ability of anesthesiologists to detect acute physiologic changes. Anesthesiology 1995; 83: 1184–1193.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Siegel JH, Baker SP, Gennarelli TA. Panel: Current status of trauma severity indices. J Trauma 1983; 23(3): 185–201.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Michels P, Gravenstein D, Westenskow DR. An integrated graphic data display improves detection and identification of critical events during anaesthesia. J Clin Monit 1997; 13: 249–259.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nielsen J. Usability engineering. San Diego: Academic Press, 1993: 165–200.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McClelland I. Product assessment and user trials. In: Wilson JR, Corlett EN, eds. Evaluation of human work. London: Taylor and Francis, 1995: 118–247.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Preece J. Human-computer interaction. Harlow, England: Addison-Wesley, 1994: 78–89.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Endsley MR. Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd annual meeting, 1988: 97–101.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Endsley MR. Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 1995; 37: 65–84.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Endsley MR. The role of situation awareness in naturalistic decision making. In: Zsambok CE, Klein G, eds. Naturalistic decision making. Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum, 1997: 269–283.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Muckler FR, Seven SA. Selecting performance measures: ‘objective’ versus ‘subjective’ measurements. Hum Factors 1992; 34: 441–455.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sinclair AM. Subjective assessment. In: Wilson JR, Corlett EN, eds. Evaluation of human work. A practical ergonomics methodology. London: Taylor and Francis, 1990: 58–88.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Product and Production Development, Division of Human Factors EngineeringChalmers University of TechnologyGöteborgSweden
  2. 2.Department of Product and Production Development, Division of Human Factors EngineeringChalmers University of TechnologyGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations