Cited by 30Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring

Two sides to every story: The Dual Perspectives Method for examining interruptions in healthcare

Open access
McCurdie, Tara, Sanderson, Penelope, Aitken, Leanne M., Liu, David·2017·Applied Ergonomics

Abstract

Interruptions are widely considered a problem in healthcare. Results from observation and experimental studies have guided extensive mitigation efforts, but the effectiveness of interventions remains mixed. We have built on current theories and methods for studying interruptions to develop a novel observational approach - the Dual Perspectives Method - for examining interruptions from the perspectives of the different work functions in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU). We detail the method and provide representative examples of the insights it offers, such as why interruptions happen, the role they play, and the consequences of preserving them or eliminating them. We anticipate that the Dual Perspectives Method will help us to arrive at a better basis on which to draw conclusions about interruptions, and will lead to the development of appropriate and sustainable interventions to ensure the effective and safe functioning of the work system under examination.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.apergo.2016.05.012

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some interruptions, especially those leading to nursing task switching, might be beneficial and necessary for the quality of the task.

    “some interruptions, especially those leading to nursing task switching, might be beneficial and necessary for the quality of the task [4, 5].”
  • Some kinds of interruptions, especially those providing necessary informational content for the initial task, contributed to improving nurses' cognitive processes and allowed them to achieve fast and efficient patient care.

    “In a study by McCurdie et al. [5, 12], some kinds of interruptions, especially those providing necessary informational content for the initial task, contributed to improving nurses’ cognitive processes, allowing them to achieve fast and efficient patient care [4].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Miller A, Weinger MB, Buerhaus P, et al. Care coordination in intensive care units: Communicating across information spaces. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 2010;52:147-61. doi:10.1177/0018720810369149 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCurdie, T., Sanderson, P., Aitken, L. M., & Liu, D.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Griffith University (AU)
Corresponding author
McCurdie, Tara
Venue
Applied Ergonomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
58
Pages
102-109
ISSN
0003-6870 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2426744622
Cited by
30
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
6.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Ergonomics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Australian Education International, Australian Government
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Keywords
intensive care unit, work function, observation method
MeSH terms
Attention, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Personnel, Hospital, Systems Analysis, Task Performance and Analysis, Causality, Workload, Observation, Patient Safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review