Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Intensive Care Medicine 10/2009

01-10-2009 | Editorial

ICU mechanical ventilators, technological advances vs. user friendliness: the right picture is worth a thousand numbers

Authors: Jean Christophe Marie Richard, Robert M. Kacmarek

Published in: Intensive Care Medicine | Issue 10/2009

Login to get access

Excerpt

Over the last two decades, technological developments have lead to significant improvements of the performances by ICU ventilators [14]. At the same time, the presentation of data and the interface of the ventilator with the clinician have also changed dramatically. In the 1980s all ventilators were mechanical in their operation [5]. All parameters were controlled by simple, and in most cases, easily accessible knobs that the clinician simply turned to the desired setting or mode. Today’s ICU ventilators are composed primarily of a series of microprocessors controlling a gas delivery platform [15]. As a result, the capabilities of today’s ICU ventilators are markedly greater than previous generations of ventilators. New modes are available, closed loop control is increasingly being used, monitoring capabilities are expanded and the user interface is different. Indeed, almost all of the newest generation of ICU ventilators incorporate a computer screen as the basis of their user interface [5]. Many have layers of menus that the user must navigate in order to make changes in ventilator settings, and many require multiple steps to make a simple change in any ventilator parameter [4, 5]. All of this has made the user interface more and more complex for the untrained individual to understand and master. As a consequence, decision making and safety may be a challenge in routine practice. It has been emphasized that human error is responsible of the majority of medical accidents [6] and that most of these accidents are considered avoidable [7]. In this context, the development of user-machine interfaces specifically designed to facilitate cognitive processes may increase the ease of care giver interactions and reduce the number of accidents. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Richard JC, Carlucci A, Breton L, Langlais N, Jaber S, Maggiore S, Fougère S, Harf A, Brochard L (2002) Bench testing of pressure support ventilation with three different generations of ventilators. Intensive Care Med 28:1049–1057PubMedCrossRef Richard JC, Carlucci A, Breton L, Langlais N, Jaber S, Maggiore S, Fougère S, Harf A, Brochard L (2002) Bench testing of pressure support ventilation with three different generations of ventilators. Intensive Care Med 28:1049–1057PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Tassaux D, Michotte JB, Gainnier M, Gratadour P, Fonseca S, Jolliet P (2004) Expiratory trigger setting in pressure support ventilation: from mathematical model to bedside. Crit Care Med 32:1844–1850PubMedCrossRef Tassaux D, Michotte JB, Gainnier M, Gratadour P, Fonseca S, Jolliet P (2004) Expiratory trigger setting in pressure support ventilation: from mathematical model to bedside. Crit Care Med 32:1844–1850PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Thille AW, Lyazidi A, Richard JC, Galia F, Brochard L (2009) A bench study of intensive-care-unit ventilators: new versus old and turbine-based versus compressed gas-based ventilators. Intensive Care Med 8 April 2009, Epub ahead of print Thille AW, Lyazidi A, Richard JC, Galia F, Brochard L (2009) A bench study of intensive-care-unit ventilators: new versus old and turbine-based versus compressed gas-based ventilators. Intensive Care Med 8 April 2009, Epub ahead of print
4.
go back to reference Marchese AD, Chipman D, de la Oliva P, Kacmarek RM (2009) Adult ICU ventilators to provide neonatal ventilation: a lung simulator study. Intensive Care Med 35:631–638PubMedCrossRef Marchese AD, Chipman D, de la Oliva P, Kacmarek RM (2009) Adult ICU ventilators to provide neonatal ventilation: a lung simulator study. Intensive Care Med 35:631–638PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Kacmarek RM, Chipman D (2006) Basic principles of ventilator machinery. In: Tobin MJ (ed) Principles and practice of mechanical ventilation, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Publishers, New York, pp 53–97 Kacmarek RM, Chipman D (2006) Basic principles of ventilator machinery. In: Tobin MJ (ed) Principles and practice of mechanical ventilation, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Publishers, New York, pp 53–97
6.
go back to reference Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M (2000) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academy Press, Washington, DC Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M (2000) To err is human: building a safer health system. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
7.
go back to reference Bracco D, Favre JB, Bissonnette B, Wasserfallen JB, Revelly JP, Ravussin P, Chioléro R (2001) Human errors in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit: a 1-year prospective study. Intensive Care Med 27:137–145PubMedCrossRef Bracco D, Favre JB, Bissonnette B, Wasserfallen JB, Revelly JP, Ravussin P, Chioléro R (2001) Human errors in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit: a 1-year prospective study. Intensive Care Med 27:137–145PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Vignaux L, Tassaux D, Philippe J (2009) Evaluation of the user-friendliness of 7 new generation ICU ventilators. Intensive Care Med 35 Vignaux L, Tassaux D, Philippe J (2009) Evaluation of the user-friendliness of 7 new generation ICU ventilators. Intensive Care Med 35
9.
go back to reference Gonzalez-Bermejo J, Laplanche V, Husseini FE, Duguet A, Derenne JP, Similowski T (2006) Evaluation of the user-friendliness of 11 home mechanical ventilators. Eur Respir J 27:1236–1243PubMedCrossRef Gonzalez-Bermejo J, Laplanche V, Husseini FE, Duguet A, Derenne JP, Similowski T (2006) Evaluation of the user-friendliness of 11 home mechanical ventilators. Eur Respir J 27:1236–1243PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Uzawa Y, Yamada Y, Suzukawa M (2008) Evaluation of the user interface simplicity in the modern generation of mechanical ventilators. Respir Care 53:329–337PubMed Uzawa Y, Yamada Y, Suzukawa M (2008) Evaluation of the user interface simplicity in the modern generation of mechanical ventilators. Respir Care 53:329–337PubMed
11.
go back to reference Cole WG, Stewart JG (1994) Human performance evaluation of a metaphor graphic display for respiratory data. Methods inf med 33:390–396PubMed Cole WG, Stewart JG (1994) Human performance evaluation of a metaphor graphic display for respiratory data. Methods inf med 33:390–396PubMed
12.
go back to reference Wachter SB, Johnson K, Albert R, Syroid N, Drews F, Westenskow D (2006) The evaluation of a pulmonary display to detect adverse respiratory events using high resolution human simulator. J Am Med Inform Assoc 13:635–642PubMedCrossRef Wachter SB, Johnson K, Albert R, Syroid N, Drews F, Westenskow D (2006) The evaluation of a pulmonary display to detect adverse respiratory events using high resolution human simulator. J Am Med Inform Assoc 13:635–642PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Joint Commision (2002) Preventing ventilator-related deaths and injuries. Sentinel Event Alert 25, 26 February 2002 Joint Commision (2002) Preventing ventilator-related deaths and injuries. Sentinel Event Alert 25, 26 February 2002
Metadata
Title
ICU mechanical ventilators, technological advances vs. user friendliness: the right picture is worth a thousand numbers
Authors
Jean Christophe Marie Richard
Robert M. Kacmarek
Publication date
01-10-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine / Issue 10/2009
Print ISSN: 0342-4642
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-009-1581-6

Other articles of this Issue 10/2009

Intensive Care Medicine 10/2009 Go to the issue