Cited by 257Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Situation Awareness in Anesthesia: Concept and Research

Open access
Schulz, Christian M., Endsley, Mica R., Kochs, Eberhard F., Gelb, Adrian W., Wagner, Klaus J.·2013·Anesthesiology

Abstract

SITUATION awareness (SA) is defined as “the perception of elements of the environment within a volume of time and space, the comprehension of their meaning and the projection of their status in the near future.”1It describes the ability of an individual to maintain an adequate internal representation of the status of the environment in complex and dynamic domains where time constants are short and conditions may change within seconds and minutes. The concept was first used in the field of military and commercial aviation and described in detail for the first time in the late 1980s by Endsley.1According to the definition, SA is subdivided into three hierarchical levels: perception (SA level I), comprehension (SA level II), and projection (SA level III).2In 1995, the concept of SA was introduced into the field of anesthesia by Gaba et al. 3Later, SA was classified as an important nontechnical skill4and was embedded in the Anaesthetists’ Non-Technical Skills (ANTS) taxonomy and behavior rating tool. This framework was designed especially for anesthetists and identified four main nontechnical skills: situation awareness, decision-making, teamwork, and task management.5In this review, the concept of SA is presented, and its importance for accurate decision-making and performance is illustrated. Insights into different approaches for the assessment of SA are provided and skills that are related to high levels of SA are described. Starting from a cognitive theoretical background, we identify types of error that may occur during the development of SA. Furthermore, implemented SA training strategies from other domains are described and discussed with respect to their applicability in anesthesia. Finally, we briefly present strategies to improve the design of patient monitors with respect to SA during daily anesthesia practice.The term SA has been used with respect to individuals, teams,1and systems.6To illustrate these different approaches, a critical incident is presented:A 68-yr-old man presented with an acute abdominal crisis and clinical signs of sepsis. General anesthesia was induced by a fourth-year anesthesia resident for exploratory laparotomy. After uneventful induction of anesthesia, a catheter was placed in the radial artery for blood pressure monitoring. An internal jugular catheter had been placed 2 days earlier. Thirty-five minutes after the start of surgery, a gastrointestinal perforation was identified as the underlying cause for peritonitis. At this point, the patient had a systolic arterial blood pressure of 95 mmHg and a heart rate of 105 beats/min despite administration of low doses of noradrenaline and 1,000 ml of crystalloids. The surgeons mentioned a diffuse bleeding tendency, and the resident started to administer fresh frozen plasma. Two minutes after starting the fresh frozen plasma, he noticed that the blood pressure had decreased substantially and that the heart rate had increased further. He looked at the surgical field and asked the surgeons whether there was any acute and uncontrolled severe bleeding. The surgeons answered in the negative. In the belief that an acute bacteremia was compromising hemodynamic stability, the resident increased the doses of noradrenaline. However, the systolic blood pressure remained low at 60 mmHg, even at a dose of 2 µg kg-1min-1of noradrenaline. At this point, he called for the senior attending anesthetist. At the same time, he noticed that the electrocardiogram ST segment was becoming progressively more depressed. He increased the fraction of inspired oxygen to 1.0. The resident informed the surgeons about the severe problems in maintaining blood pressure and about relevant changes in the electrocardiogram. He also indicated that a myocardial infarction could be the cause of this constellation and advised the surgeons to be prepared to perform chest compressions. A nurse was requested to prepare adrenaline for both bolus injections and continuous administration. Some minutes later, the senior anesthetist entered the operating room and, after a short phase of orientation, advised the resident to administer adrenaline. At the moment of injecting adrenaline into the central venous line, the resident noticed severe urticaria in the skin in the vicinity of the central venous line. He immediately communicated this finding to the senior attending anesthetist, and the diagnosis of anaphylactic shock caused by fresh frozen plasma was made. After administration of histamine blockers and glucocorticoids, the remainder of the surgical procedure was uneventful and the patient recovered without any neurologic deficits.SA level I (perception of the patient’s state) was formed in the aforementioned case by collecting relevant information from monitoring the patient’s vital parameters (low blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation, electrocardiogram), the surgical field (no bleeding), and the appearance of the patient (urticaria). Additional information was acquired

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 · 10.1097/aln.0b013e318280a40f

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Lapses in SA are a primary cause of safety-related incidents and accidents.

    “Lapses in SA are a primary cause of safety-related incidents and accidents [13, 14].”

    From Use of artificial intelligence in critical care: opportunities and obstacles (2024) · cites this paper as [13]

    The SA Errors section says that affected situation-awareness elements may lead to poor performance, and SA Level I gives an example of a lapse during a critical incident. These passages support a link between SA lapses and safety risks, but do not establish that they are a primary cause of incidents and accidents. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Situational awareness is foundational to decisions and actions in sectors like aviation and medicine.

    “Situational awareness (SA) is foundational to decisions and actions in sectors like aviation and medicine [13].”
  • The rapid advances in AI, and in particular the release of publicly available generative AI applications leveraging advanced large language models, have greatly accelerated discussions considering the promises and pitfalls related to AI deployment in society and healthcare.

    “The rapid advances in AI, and in particular the release of publicly available generative AI applications leveraging advanced large language models, have greatly accelerated discussions considering the promises and pitfalls related to AI deployment in society and healthcare [7–17].”

    From Use of artificial intelligence in critical care: opportunities and obstacles (2024) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Applicability in Anesthesia and Synthesis passages discuss situation-awareness training and patient-monitor design, not AI deployment. Searches for generative AI, large language models, and discussion of AI’s promises and pitfalls found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 73

  1. Endsley MR: Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, October24-28, 1988, pp 97-101
  2. Endsley MR: Towards a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 1995; 37:32-64
  3. Gaba DM, Howard SK, Small SD: Situation awareness in anesthesiology. Hum Factors 1995; 37:20-31
  4. Fletcher GC, McGeorge P, Flin RH, Glavin RJ, Maran NJ: The role of non-technical skills in anaesthesia: A review of cur- rent literature. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88:418-29
  5. Fletcher G, Flin R, McGeorge P, Glavin R, Maran N, Patey R: Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills (ANTS): Evaluation of a behavioural marker system. Br J Anaesth 2003; 90:580-8
  6. Stanton NA, Stewart R, Harris D, Houghton RJ, Baber C, McMaster R, Salmon P, Hoyle G, Walker G, Young MS, Linsell M, Dymott R, Green D: Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: Theoretical development and applica- tion of an ergonomics methodology. Ergonomics 2006; 49:1288-311
  7. Endsley MR, Garland. DJ: Theoretical underpinnings of situa- tion awareness: A critical review, Situation Awareness: Analysis and Measurement. Edited by Endsley MR, Garland DJ, Mahwah NJ. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000, pp 3-32
  8. Bolstad CA, Cuevas HM: Integrating situation awareness assessment into test and evaluation. ITEA J 2010; 31:240-6
  9. Schulz CM, Schneider E, Fritz L, Vockeroth J, Hapfelmeier A, Brandt T, Kochs EF, Schneider G: Visual attention of anaes- thetists during simulated critical incidents. Br J Anaesth 2011; 106:807-13
  10. Fioratou E, Flin R, Glavin R, Patey R: Beyond monitoring: Distributed situation awareness in anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2010; 105:83-90
  11. Xiao Y, Mackenzie CF, Patey R: Team coordination and break- downs in a real-life stressful environment. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, Chicago, October5-9, 1998, pp 186-90
  12. Westli HK, Johnsen BH, Eid J, Rasten I, Brattebø G: Teamwork skills, shared mental models, and performance in simulated trauma teams: An independent group design. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2010; 18:47
  13. Moiser K, Chidester T: Situation assessment and situation awareness in a team setting, Designing for Everyone. Edited by Queinnec Y, Danielou F. London, Taylor & Francis, 1991, pp 798-800
  14. Ford S, Daniels J, Lim J, Koval V, Dumont G, Schwarz SK, Ansermino JM: A novel vibrotactile display to improve the performance of anesthesiologists in a simulated critical inci- dent. Anesth Analg 2008; 106:1182-8
  15. Hogan MP, Pace DE, Hapgood J, Boone DC: Use of human patient simulation and the situation awareness global assess- ment technique in practical trauma skills assessment. J Trauma 2006; 61:1047-52
  16. Zhang Y, Drews FA, Westenskow DR, Foresti S, Agutter J, Bermudez JC, Blike G, Loeb R: Effects of integrated graphi- cal displays on situation awareness in anaesthesiology. Cogn Technol Work 2002; 4:82-90
  17. Hänsel M, Winkelmann AM, Hardt F, Gijselaers W, Hacker W, Stiehl M, Koch T, Müller MP: Impact of simulator training and crew resource management training on final-year medi- cal students' performance in sepsis resuscitation: A random- ized trial. Minerva Anestesiol 2012; 78:901-9
  18. Sarter NB, Woods DD: Situation awareness: A critical but ill- defined phenomenon. Int J Aviat Psychol 1991; 1:45-57
  19. Reader TW, Flin R, Mearns K, Cuthbertson BH: Team situa- tion awareness and the anticipation of patient progress dur- ing ICU rounds. BMJ Qual Saf 2011; 20:1035-42
  20. Salmon P, Stanton N, Walker G, Green D: Situation aware- ness measurement: A review of applicability for C4i environ- ments. Appl Ergon 2006; 37:225-38
  21. Salmon PM, Stanton NA, Walker GH, Jenkins D, Ladva D, Rafferty L, Young M: Measuring situation awareness in com- plex systems: Comparison of measures study. Int J Ind Ergon 2009; 39:490-500
  22. Endsley MR, Sollenberger R, Stein E: Situation awareness: A com- parison of measures. In Proceedings of the Human Performance, Situation Awareness and Automation: User Centered Design for the New Millennium Conference, Savannah, 2000
  23. Endsley MR, Selcon SJ, Hardiman TD, Croft D: A compara- tive evaluation of SAGAT and SART for evaluations of situ- ation awareness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, Chicago, October5-9, 1988, pp 82-6
  24. Jones DG, Endsley MR: Using real time probes for measuring situation awareness. Int J Aviat Psychol 2004; 14:343-67
  25. Jones DG, Endsley MR: Can real-time probes provide a valid measure of situation awareness? In Proceedings of the Human Performance, Situation Awareness and Automation: User Centered Design for the New Millennium Conference, Savannah, 2000
  26. Selcon SJ, Taylor R, Koritsas E: Workload or situational aware- ness?: TLX vs SART for aerospace systems design evaluation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting, San Francisco, September 2-6, 1991
  27. Morgan PJ, Kurrek MM, Bertram S, LeBlanc V, Przybyszewski T: Nontechnical skills assessment after simulation-based con- tinuing medical education. Simul Healthc 2011; 6:255-9
  28. Graham J, Hocking G, Giles E: Anaesthesia non-technical skills: Can anaesthetists be trained to reliably use this behav- ioural marker system in 1 day? Br J Anaesth 2010; 104:440-5
  29. Flin R, Patey R, Glavin R, Maran N: Anaesthetists' non-techni- cal skills. Br J Anaesth 2010; 105:38-44
  30. Bruppacher HR, Alam SK, LeBlanc VR, Latter D, Naik VN, Savoldelli GL, Mazer CD, Kurrek MM, Joo HS: Simulation- based training improves physicians' performance in patient care in high-stakes clinical setting of cardiac surgery. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2010; 112:985-92
  31. Yee B, Naik VN, Joo HS, Savoldelli GL, Chung DY, Houston PL, Karatzoglou BJ, Hamstra SJ: Nontechnical skills in anes- thesia crisis management with repeated exposure to simula- tion-based education. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2005; 103:241-8
  32. Zausig YA, Grube C, Boeker-Blum T, Busch CJ, Bayer Y, Sinner B, Zink W, Schaper N, Graf BM: Inefficacy of simula- tor-based training on anaesthesiologists' non-technical skills. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53:611-9
  33. Welke TM, LeBlanc VR, Savoldelli GL, Joo HS, Chandra DB, Crabtree NA, Naik VN: Personalized oral debriefing versus standardized multimedia instruction after patient crisis simu- lation. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:183-9
  34. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, Joo HS, Chow R, Hamstra SJ: Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: Oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2006; 105:279-85
  35. Boet S, Bould MD, Bruppacher HR, Desjardins F, Chandra DB, Naik VN: Looking in the mirror: Self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises. Crit Care Med 2011; 39:1377-81
  36. Kim J, Neilipovitz D, Cardinal P, Chiu M: A comparison of global rating scale and checklist scores in the validation of an evaluation tool to assess performance in the resuscitation of critically ill patients during simulated emergencies (abbrevi- ated as "CRM simulator study IB"). Simul Healthc 2009; 4:6-16
  37. Kreith F: The CRC Handbook of Mechanical Engineering. Boca Raton, CRC Press, 1998
  38. Hazlehurst B, McMullen CK, Gorman PN: Distributed cog- nition in the heart room: How situation awareness arises from coordinated communications during cardiac surgery. J Biomed Inform 2007; 40:539-51
  39. Boulet JR, Murray DJ: Simulation-based assessment in anes- thesiology: Requirements for practical implementation. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2010; 112:1041-52
  40. Murray DJ, Boulet JR, Avidan M, Kras JF, Henrichs B, Woodhouse J, Evers AS: Performance of residents and anesthesiologists in a simulation-based skill assessment. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2007; 107:705-13
  41. Fehr JJ, Boulet JR, Waldrop WB, Snider R, Brockel M, Murray DJ: Simulation-based assessment of pediatric anesthesia skills. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2011; 115:1308-15
  42. Devitt JH, Kurrek MM, Cohen MM, Cleave-Hogg D: The validity of performance assessments using simulation. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2001; 95:36-42
  43. Boulet JR, Murray D, Kras J, Woodhouse J, McAllister J, Ziv A: Reliability and validity of a simulation-based acute care skills assessment for medical students and residents. ANESTHESIOLOGY 2003; 99:1270-80
  44. Byrne AJ, Greaves JD: Assessment instruments used during anaesthetic simulation: Review of published studies. Br J Anaesth 2001; 86:445-50
  45. Schulz CM, Mayer V, Kreuzer M, Kochs EF, Schneider G: A tool for immediate and automated assessment of resuscita- tion skills for a full-scale simulator. BMC Res Notes 2011; 4:550
  46. Byrne AJ, Jones JG: Responses to simulated anaesthetic emer- gencies by anaesthetists with different durations of clinical experience. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78:553-6
  47. Görges M, Staggers N: Evaluations of physiological monitor- ing displays: A systematic review. J Clin Monit Comput 2008; 22:45-66
  48. Charabati S, Bracco D, Mathieu PA, Hemmerling TM: Comparison of four different display designs of a novel anaesthetic monitoring system, the 'integrated monitor of anaesthesia (IMA)'. Br J Anaesth 2009; 103:670-7
  49. Liu D, Jenkins SA, Sanderson PM, Watson MO, Leane T, Kruys A, Russell WJ: Monitoring with head-mounted displays: Performance and safety in a full-scale simulator and part-task trainer. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:1135-46
  50. Sanderson PM, Watson MO, Russell WJ, Jenkins S, Liu D, Green N, Llewelyn K, Cole P, Shek V, Krupenia SS: Advanced auditory displays and head-mounted displays: Advantages and disadvantages for monitoring by the distracted anesthe- siologist. Anesth Analg 2008; 106:1787-97
  51. Liu D, Jenkins SA, Sanderson PM, Fabian P, Russell WJ: Monitoring with head-mounted displays in general anesthe- sia: A clinical evaluation in the operating room. Anesth Analg 2010; 110:1032-8
  52. Koivisto M, Hyönä J, Revonsuo A: The effects of eye move- ments, spatial attention, and stimulus features on inatten- tional blindness. Vision Res 2004; 44:3211-21
  53. Pappas JM, Fishel SR, Moss JD, Hicks JM, Leech TD: An eye- tracking approach to inattentional blindness. In Proceedings Schulz et al. Situation Awareness in Anesthesia of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual Meeting, Orlando, September 26-30, 2005, pp 1658-62
  54. Endsley MR, Bolstad CA: Individual differences in pilot situ- ation awareness. Int J Aviat Psychol 1994; 3:241-64
  55. Endsley MR: Expertise and situation awareness, The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, 1st edition.
  56. Edited by Ericsson KA, Charness P, Feltovich P, Hoffman R. New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp 633-51
  57. Klein G: Sources of error in naturalistic decision-making tasks. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 11-15, 1993, pp 368-71
  58. Endsley MR, Jones DG: SA oriented training, Designing for Situation Awareness: An Approach to User Centered Design, 2nd edition. Edited by Endsley MR, Jones DG. London, Taylor & Francis, 2011, pp 235-56
  59. Robinson D: The development of flight crew situation aware- ness in commercial transport aircraft. In Proceedings of the Human Performance, Situation Awareness and Automation: User-Centered Design for a New Millennium Conference, Marietta, 2000, pp 88-93
  60. Helmreich RL, Merrit AC, Sherman PJ: Research project eval- uates the effect of national culture on flight crew behaviour. ICAO J 1996; 51:14-6
  61. Reason J: Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents, 1st edition. London, Ashgate Press, 1997
  62. Hormann H, Blokziji C, Polo L: ESSAI: A European train- ing solution for enhancing situation awareness and threat management on modern aircraft flight decks. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual European Aviation Safety Seminar of the Flight Safety Foundation and European Regions Airline Association, Barcelona, 2004
  63. Bolstad CA, Endsley MR, Costello A: General aviation pilot training for situation awareness: An evaluation. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Baltimore, September 29-October 4, 2002, pp 21-5
  64. Strater LD, Reynolds J, Faulkner LA, Birch K, Hyatt J, Swetman S, Endsley MR: PC-based tools to improve infantry situation awareness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, New Orleans, September20-24, 2004, 668-72E
  65. Kaber DB, Riley JM, Lampton D, Endsley MR: Measuring situation awareness in a virtual urban environment for dismounted infantry training. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on HCI, Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum, 2005
  66. Kaber DB, Riley JM, Sheik-Nainar MA, Hyatt J, Reynolds J: Assessing infantry soldier situation awareness in virtual environment-based training of urban terrain operations. In Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Association, Maastricht, 2006
  67. Helmreich R, Klinect J, Wilhelm J: Models of threat, error and CRM in flight operations. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, Columbus, OH, May 3-6, 1999, pp 677-82
  68. Kiefer N, Hoeft A: Display of information in the operating room. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2010; 23:772-7
  69. Panel on Human Factors in the Design of Tactical Display Systems for the Individual Soldier: Tactical Display for Soldiers: Human Factors Considerations. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 1997
  70. Leedal JM, Smith AF: Methodological approaches to anaes- thetists' workload in the operating theatre. Br J Anaesth 2005; 94:702-9
  71. Schulz CM, Schneider E, Fritz L, Vockeroth J, Hapfelmeier A, Wasmaier M, Kochs EF, Schneider G: Eye tracking for assess- ment of workload: A pilot study in an anaesthesia simulator environment. Br J Anaesth 2011; 106:44-50
  72. Schulz CM, Skrzypczak M, Schneider E, Hapfelmeier A, Martin J, Kochs EF, Schneider G: Assessment of subjective workload in an anaesthesia simulator environment: Reliability and validity. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2011; 28:502-5
  73. Ford S, Birmingham E, King A, Lim J, Ansermino JM: At-a-glance monitoring: Covert observations of anes- thesiologists in the operating room. Anesth Analg 2010; 111:653-8

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schulz, C. M., Endsley, M. R., Kochs, E. F., Gelb, A. W., & Wagner, K. J.
Affiliations
  • Assistant Professor.
  • SA Technologies (United States) (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Professor and Chairman.
  • TUM Klinikum (DE)
Venue
Anesthesiology
Published
2013-03-01
Volume
118
Issue
3
Pages
729-742
ISSN
0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104573287
Cited by
257
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 6
FWCI
35.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Anesthesiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
situational awareness, anesthesia, non-technical skills, decision-making, teamwork, task management, patient monitoring systems, display design, critical incidents, sepsis, gastrointestinal perforation, hemodynamic monitoring, patient safety
MeSH terms
Aged, Anaphylaxis, Anesthesia, Awareness, Clinical Competence, Humans, Male, Biomedical 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