RESUMEN
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Infection prevention efforts in dialysis centers can avert patient morbidity and mortality but are challenging to implement. The objective of this study was to better understand how the design of the work system might contribute to infection prevention in outpatient dialysis centers. STUDY DESIGN: Mixed methods, observational study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Six dialysis facilities across the United States visited by a multidisciplinary team over 8 months. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: At each facility, structured macroergonomic observations were undertaken by a multidisciplinary team using the SEIPS 1.0 model. Ethnographic observations were collected about staff encounters with dialysis patients including the content of staff conversations. Selective and axial coding were used for qualitative analysis and quantitative data were reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Organizational and sociotechnical barriers and facilitators to infection prevention in the outpatient dialysis setting were identified. Features related to human performance, (eg, alarms, interruptions, and task stacking), work system design (eg, physical space, scheduling, leadership, and culture), and extrinsic factors (eg, patient-related characteristics) were identified. LIMITATIONS: This was an exploratory evaluation with a small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: This study used a systematic macroergonomic approach in multiple outpatient dialysis facilities to identify infection prevention barriers and facilitators related to human performance. Several features common across facilities were identified that may influence infection prevention in outpatient care and warrant further exploration.
RESUMEN
In recent years, the focus of implementation science (IS) shifted to emphasize the influence of contextual factors on intervention adaptations in clinical, community, and corporate settings. Each of these settings represent a unique work system with varying contexts that influence human capabilities, needs, and performance (otherwise known as "human factors"). The ease of human interaction with a work system or an intervention is imperative to IS outcomes, particularly adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Both scientific approaches consider the "big picture" when designing interventions for users and stakeholders to improve work and health outcomes. IS and human factors are therefore complementary in nature. In this paper, the authors will (1) provide perspective on the synergistic relationship between human factors and IS using two illustrative and applied cases and (2) outline practical considerations for human factors-based strategies to identify contextual factors that influence intervention adoption, implementation, and maintenance dimensions of the RE-AIM framework. This article expands on recent research that developed user- and human-centered design strategies for IS scientists to use. However, defining the complementary relationship between IS and human factors is a necessary and valuable step in maximizing the effectiveness of IS to transform healthcare. While IS can complement practitioners' identification of intervention adaptations, human interaction is a process in the work system often overlooked throughout implementation. Further work is needed to address the influence that organizational endorsement and trust have on intervention adaptations and their translation into the work system.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Face shields are a critical piece of personal protective equipment and their comfort impacts compliant use and thus protectiveness. Optimal design criteria for face shield use in healthcare environments are limited. We attempt to identify factors affecting face shield usability and to test and optimize a face shield for comfort and function in health care settings. METHODS: A broad range of workers in a large health care system were surveyed regarding face shield features and usability. Quantitative and qualitative analysis informed the development of iterative prototypes which were tested against existing shields. Iterative testing and redesign utilized expert insight and feedback from participant focus groups to inform subsequent prototype designs. RESULTS: From 1,648 responses, 6 key elements were identified: ability to adjust tension, shifting load bearing from the temples, anti-fogging, ventilation, freedom of movement, and durability. Iterative prototypes received consistently excellent feedback based on use in the clinical environment, demonstrating incremental improvement. CONCLUSION: We defined elements of face shield design necessary for usability in health care and produced a highly functional face shield that satisfies frontline provider criteria and Emergency Use Authorization standards set by the Food and Drug Administration. Integrating human factors principles into rapid-cycle prototyping for personal protective equipment is feasible and valuable.
