CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 37Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorHospital Admissions and Outcomes

Traditions of research into interruptions in healthcare: A conceptual review

Open access
McCurdie, Tara, Sanderson, Penelope, Aitken, Leanne M.·2017·International Journal of Nursing Studies
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.11.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background Researchers from diverse theoretical backgrounds have studied workplace interruptions in healthcare, leading to a complex and conflicting body of literature. Understanding pre-existing viewpoints may advance the field more effectively than attempts to remove bias from investigations.Objective To identify research traditions that have motivated and guided interruptions research, and to note research questions posed, gaps in approach, and possible avenues for future research.Methods A critical review was conducted of research on interruptions in healthcare. Two researchers identified core research communities based on the community's motivations, philosophical outlook, and methods. Among the characteristics used to categorise papers into research communities were the predominant motivation for studying interruptions, the research questions posed, and key contributions to the body of knowledge on interruptions in healthcare. In cases where a paper approached an equal number of characteristics from two traditions, it was placed in a blended research community.Results A total of 141 papers were identified and categorised; all papers identified were published from 1994 onwards. Four principal research communities emerged: epidemiology, quality improvement, cognitive systems engineering (CSE), and applied cognitive psychology. Blends and areas of mutual influence between the research communities were identified that combine the benefits of individual traditions, but there was a notable lack of blends incorporating quality improvement initiatives. The question most commonly posed by researchers across multiple communities was: what is the impact of interruptions? Impact was measured as a function of task time or risk in the epidemiology tradition, situation awareness in the CSE tradition, or resumption lag (time to resume an interrupted task) in the applied cognitive psychology tradition. No single question about interruptions in healthcare was shared by all four of the core communities.Conclusions Much research on workplace interruptions in healthcare can be described in terms of fundamental values of four distinct research traditions and the communities that bring the values and methods: of those research traditions to their investigations. Blends between communities indicate that mutual influence has occurred as interruptions research has progressed. It is clear from this review that there is no single or privileged perspective to study interruptions. Instead, these findings suggest that researchers investigating interruptions in healthcare would benefit from being more aware of different perspectives from their own, especially when they consider workplace interventions to reduce interruptions.

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.ijnurstu.2016.11.005

Cites

193 of 193 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 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].”

    From Workflow interruption and nurses’ mental workload in electronic health record tasks: An observational study (2023) · cites this paper as [12]

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: 2

  1. Scholz DA. Establishing and monitoring an edemic medication error rate. J Nurs Qual Assur 1990;4:71-85.
  2. Friedman S, Elinson R, Arenovich T. A study of emergency physician work and communication: a human factors approach. Isr J Emerg Med 2005;5:35-42. 143

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
McCurdie, T., Sanderson, P., & Aitken, L. M.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Griffith University (AU)
Corresponding author
McCurdie, Tara
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
66
Pages
23-36
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.11.005
OpenAlex
W2556055693
Cited by
37
References
193
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (submittedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP140101821)
  • Australian Postgraduate Award
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 › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
Keywords
workplace interruptions, research traditions, academic community, cognitive systems engineering, applied cognitive psychology, quality improvement, situational awareness, task interruption, workplace interventions
MeSH terms
Continuity of Patient Care, Humans, Research

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