INTRODUCTION: We used eye-tracking technology to explore the visual perception of clinicians during a high-fidelity simulation scenario. We hypothesized that physicians who were able to successfully manage a critical situation would have a different visual focus compared to those who failed. METHODS: A convenience sample of 18 first-year emergency medicine residents were enrolled voluntarily to participate in a high-fidelity scenario involving a patient in shock with a 3rd degree atrioventricular block. Their performance was rated as pass or fail and depended on the proper use of the pacing unit. Participants were wearing pre-calibrated eye-tracking glasses throughout the 9-min scenario and infrared (IR) markers installed in the simulator were used to define various Areas of Interest (AOI). Total View Duration (TVD) and Time to First Fixation (TFF) by the participants were recorded for each AOI and the results were used to produce heat maps. RESULTS: Twelve residents succeeded while six failed the scenario. The TVD for the AOI containing the pacing unit was significantly shorter (median [quartile]) for those who succeeded compared to the ones who failed (42 [31-52] sec vs. 70 [61-90] sec, p = 0.0097). The TFF for the AOI containing the ECG and vital signs monitor was also shorter for the participants who succeeded than for those who failed (22 [6-28] sec vs. 30 [27-77] sec, p = 0.0182). DISCUSSION: There seemed to be a connection between the gaze pattern of residents in a high-fidelity bradycardia simulation and their performance. The participants who succeeded looked at the monitor earlier (diagnosis). They also spent less time fixating the pacing unit, using it promptly to address the bradycardia. This study suggests that eye-tracking technology could be used to explore how visual perception, a key information-gathering element, is tied to decision-making and clinical performance.
INTRODUCTION: We used eye-tracking technology to explore the visual perception of clinicians during a high-fidelity simulation scenario. We hypothesized that physicians who were able to successfully manage a critical situation would have a different visual focus compared to those who failed. METHODS: A convenience sample of 18 first-year emergency medicine residents were enrolled voluntarily to participate in a high-fidelity scenario involving a patient in shock with a 3rd degree atrioventricular block. Their performance was rated as pass or fail and depended on the proper use of the pacing unit. Participants were wearing pre-calibrated eye-tracking glasses throughout the 9-min scenario and infrared (IR) markers installed in the simulator were used to define various Areas of Interest (AOI). Total View Duration (TVD) and Time to First Fixation (TFF) by the participants were recorded for each AOI and the results were used to produce heat maps. RESULTS: Twelve residents succeeded while six failed the scenario. The TVD for the AOI containing the pacing unit was significantly shorter (median [quartile]) for those who succeeded compared to the ones who failed (42 [31-52] sec vs. 70 [61-90] sec, p = 0.0097). The TFF for the AOI containing the ECG and vital signs monitor was also shorter for the participants who succeeded than for those who failed (22 [6-28] sec vs. 30 [27-77] sec, p = 0.0182). DISCUSSION: There seemed to be a connection between the gaze pattern of residents in a high-fidelity bradycardia simulation and their performance. The participants who succeeded looked at the monitor earlier (diagnosis). They also spent less time fixating the pacing unit, using it promptly to address the bradycardia. This study suggests that eye-tracking technology could be used to explore how visual perception, a key information-gathering element, is tied to decision-making and clinical performance.
Entities:
Keywords:
eye-tracking; medical education; performance
Authors: Mathieu Tourangeau; Issam Tanoubi; Roger Perron; Marie-Ève Bélanger; Komi Sodoké; Pierre Drolet; Arnaud Robitaille; L Mihai Georgescu Journal: Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Emanuele Capogna; Giorgio Capogna; Denise Raccis; Francesco Salvi; Matteo Velardo; Angelica Del Vecchio Journal: Adv Simul (Lond) Date: 2021-02-04
Authors: Tadzio R Roche; Elise J C Maas; Sadiq Said; Julia Braun; Carl Machado; Donat R Spahn; Christoph B Noethiger; David W Tscholl Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2022-05-30 Impact factor: 2.376