Hospitals need more guidance on implementing guidelines for the safe use of medical devices

Design and evaluation of a prototype of augmented reality applied to medical devices

BACKGROUND

According to current legislation, medical devices have to incorporate all the necessary information to eliminate or greatly minimise any problem associated with their use. However, the physical capacity of the actual device's packaging may frequently not be enough to contain all this information. To address this limitation, this study aimed to design and evaluate a prototype app for mobile devices applying augmented reality technology. The main feature of this kind of technology is combining virtual images with images from the real world.

METHODS

This work, carried out in Spain, was developed in three different phases. 1) Assessment of users' needs: Through a focus group and an online questionnaire, information was obtained about the following aspects: type of medical devices likely to be included in the app, relevant information that should be included and format in which this information should be presented. 2) Development of the prototype: Considering all the functional features identified in the previous phase, the software was developed by a team of professionals specialised in AR technology and applying a user-centred model. 3) Evaluation of the software: functionality and usability were assessed by means of the think-aloud method.

RESULTS

1) Assessment of users' needs: a total of 11 nurses participated in the focus group and 280 healthcare professionals answered the questionnaire. Their findings showed that users consider that information about the following aspects of medical devices should be included in the app: instructions for use, indications for use, brief description of the device, special precautions and biocompatibility, image of the content with its components and meaning of icons. 2) Description of the prototype: Once the app has been launched, when the user scans the medical device with the mobile device camera, access to the home screen is activated, where three sections can be found: name of the medical device, image of the device and four icons which provide access to: a brief description of the device, a detailed description of it, the packaging iconography and a video about use of the device. 3) Evaluation of the software: the app was defined by users as "very intuitive". They highlighted, as one of its main positive aspects, the chance to obtain information about the medical device just by scanning the object. Additionally, the evaluation performed through the think-aloud method identified potential improvements in the app. These improvements were subsequently implemented to make the prototype more functional.

CONCLUSION

Working with potential prototype users made it possible to identify information considered relevant for these users and to delve into the format which they consider more appropriate to show this information in the prototype. Our results show that AR technology can be used as support for clinical practice.

EXPLORING MEDICAL DEVICES: THE USE OF RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS AND THEIR LINK WITH TRAINING IN HOSPITALS

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the risk assessment tools and criteria used to assess the risk of medical devices in hospitals, and to explore the link between the risk of a medical device and how those risks impact or alter the training of staff.

METHODS

Within a broader questionnaire on implementation of a national guideline, we collected quantitative data regarding the types of risk assessment tools used in hospitals and the training of healthcare staff.

RESULTS

The response rate for the questionnaire was 81 percent; a total of sixty-five of eighty Dutch hospitals. All hospitals use a risk assessment tool and the biggest cluster (40 percent) use a tool developed internally. The criteria used to assess risk most often are: the function of the device (92 percent), the severity of adverse events (88 percent) and the frequency of use (77 percent). Forty-seven of fifty-six hospitals (84 percent) base their training on the risk associated with a medical device. For medium- and high-risk devices, the main method is practical training. As risk increases, the amount and type of training and examination increases.

CONCLUSIONS

Dutch hospitals use a wide range of tools to assess the risk of medical devices. These tools are often based on the same criteria: the function of the device, the potential severity of adverse events, and the frequency of use. Furthermore, these tools are used to determine the amount and type of training required for staff. If the risk of a device is higher, then the training and examination is more extensive.