Literature DB >> 16356823

Physical and cognitive task analysis in interventional radiology.

S Johnson1, A Healey, J Evans, M Murphy, M Crawshaw, D Gould.   

Abstract

AIM: To identify, describe and detail the cognitive thought processes, decision-making, and physical actions involved in the preparation and successful performance of core interventional radiology procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five commonly performed core interventional radiology procedures were selected for cognitive task analysis. Several examples of each procedure being performed by consultant interventional radiologists were videoed. The videos of those procedures, and the steps required for successful outcome, were analysed by a psychologist and an interventional radiologist. Once a skeleton algorithm of the procedures was defined, further refinement was achieved using individual interview techniques with consultant interventional radiologists. Additionally a critique of each iteration of the established algorithm was sought from non-participating independent consultant interventional radiologists.
RESULTS: Detailed task descriptions and decision protocols were developed for five interventional radiology procedures (arterial puncture, nephrostomy, venous access, biopsy-using both ultrasound and computed tomography, and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiogram). Identical tasks performed within these procedures were identified and standardized within the protocols.
CONCLUSIONS: Complex procedures were broken down and their constituent processes identified. This might be suitable for use as a training protocol to provide a universally acceptable safe practice at the most fundamental level. It is envisaged that data collected in this way can be used as an educational resource for trainees and could provide the basis for a training curriculum in interventional radiology. It will direct trainees towards safe practice of the highest standard. It will also provide performance objectives of a simulator model.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16356823     DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2005.09.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  6 in total

1.  The effect of skin entry site, needle angulation and soft tissue compression on simulated antegrade and retrograde femoral arterial punctures: an anatomical study using Cartesian co-ordinates derived from CT angiography.

Authors:  Matthew D B S Tam; Mark Lewis
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 1.246

2.  Using simulation for interventional radiology training.

Authors:  D Gould
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Training on a vascular interventional simulator: an observational study.

Authors:  Darren Klass; Matthew D B S Tam; John Cockburn; Stuart Williams; Andoni P Toms
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-07-11       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Comparative ergonomic workflow and user experience analysis of MRI versus fluoroscopy-guided vascular interventions: an iliac angioplasty exemplar case study.

Authors:  Fabiola Fernández-Gutiérrez; Santiago Martínez; Martin A Rube; Benjamin F Cox; Mahsa Fatahi; Kenneth C Scott-Brown; J Graeme Houston; Helen McLeod; Richard D White; Karen French; Mariana Gueorguieva; Erwin Immel; Andreas Melzer
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2015-02-21       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  Development and application of a multi-modal task analysis to support intelligent tutoring of complex skills.

Authors:  Anna Skinner; David Diller; Rohit Kumar; Jan Cannon-Bowers; Roger Smith; Alyssa Tanaka; Danielle Julian; Ray Perez
Journal:  Int J STEM Educ       Date:  2018-04-15

6.  Value-assessment of computer-assisted navigation strategies during percutaneous needle placement.

Authors:  Imke Boekestijn; Samaneh Azargoshasb; Matthias N van Oosterom; Leon J Slof; Petra Dibbets-Schneider; Jenny Dankelman; Arian R van Erkel; Daphne D D Rietbergen; Fijs W B van Leeuwen
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2022-08-07       Impact factor: 3.421

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.