Cognitive Maps to Visualise Clinical Cases in Handovers

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Background: Clinical handovers at changes of shifts are typical scenarios of time restricted and information intensive communication, which are highly cognitively demanding. The currently available applications supporting handovers typically present complex information in a textual checklist-like manner. This presentation style has been criticised for not meeting the specific user requirements.

Objectives: We, therefore, aimed at developing a concept for visualising the overview of a clinical case that serves as an alternative way to checklist-like presentations in clinical handovers. We also aimed at implementing this concept in a handoverEHR in order to support the pre-handover phase, the actual handover, and the post-handover phase as well as at evaluating its usability and attractiveness.

Results: We developed and implemented a concept that draws on Tolman’s pioneering work on cognitive maps that we designed in accordance with Gestalt principles. These maps provide a pictorial overview of a clinical case. The application to build, manipulate, and store the cognitive maps was integrated into an openEHR based handover record that extends conventional records with handover specific information. Usability (n = 28) and attractiveness (n = 26) testing with experienced clinicians resulted in good ratings for suitability for the task as well as for attractiveness and pragmatism.

Conclusion: We propose cognitive maps to represent and visualise the clinical case in situations where there is limited time to present complex information.

• References

• 1 Randell R, Wilson S, Woodward P, Galliers J. Beyond handover: supporting awareness for continuous coverage.. Cogn Tech Work 2010; 12 (04) 271-283.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Cohen MD, Hilligoss PB. The published literature on handoffs in hospitals: deficiencies identified in an extensive review.. Qual Saf Health Care 2010; 19 (06) 493-497.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Cohen MD, Hilligoss PB, Kajdacsy-Balla Amaral AC. A handoff is not a telegram: an understanding of the patient is co-constructed.. Critical Care (London, England) 2012; 16 (01) 303.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Drach-Zahavy A, Goldblatt H, Maizel A. Between standardisation and resilience: nurses’ emergent risk management strategies during handovers.. J Clin Nurs 2015; 24 (3-4) 592-601.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Reason JT. Human error. 20th print. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 2009: 302.
  Google Scholar
• 6 Flemming D, Hübner U. How to improve change of shift handovers and collaborative grounding and what role does the electronic patient record system play? Results of a systematic literature review.. Int J Med Inform 2013; 82 (07) 580-592.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Ludikhuize J, de Jonge E, Goossens A. Measuring adherence among nurses one year after training in applying the Modified Early Warning Score and Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation instruments.. Resuscitation 2011; 82 (011) 1428-1433.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Field TS, Tjia J, Mazor KM, Donovan JL, Kanaan AO, Harrold LR. et al. Randomized trial of a warfarin communication protocol for nursing homes: an SBAR-based approach.. Am J Med 2011; 124 (02) 179.e1-7.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Joffe E, Turley JP, Hwang KO, Johnson TR, Johnson CW, Bernstam EV. Evaluation of a problem-specific SBAR tool to improve after-hours nurse-physician phone communication: a randomized trial.. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2013; 39 (011) 495-501.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Sexton A, Chan C, Elliott M, Stuart J, Jayasuriya R, Crookes P. Nursing handovers: do we really need them?. J Nurs Manag 2004; 12 (01) 37-42.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Philibert I. Use of strategies from high-reliability organisations to the patient hand-off by resident physicians: practical implications.. Qual Saf Health Care 2009; 18 (04) 261-266.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Anderson J, Shroff D, Curtis A, Eldridge N, Cannon K, Karnani R. et al. The Veterans Affairs shift change physician-to-physician handoff project.. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2010; 36 (02) 62-71.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Patel VP, Youngman J, Haddad FS, Patel JV, Raptis D, Christofi T. et al. Development of electronic software for the management of trauma patients on the orthopaedic unit.. Injury 2009; 40 (04) 388-396.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Raptis DA, Fernandes C, Chua W, Boulos PB. Electronic software significantly improves quality of handover in a London teaching hospital.. Health Informatics J 2009; 15 (03) 191-198.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Flemming D, Paul M, Hübner U. Building a Common Ground on the Clinical Case: Design, Implementation and Evaluation of an Information Model for a Handover EHR.. Stud Health Technol Inform 2014; 201: 167-174.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Sharit J, McCane L, Thevenin DM, Barach P. Examining links between sign-out reporting during shift changeovers and patient management risks.. Risk Anal 2008; 28 (04) 969-981.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 openEHR Foundation [Internet] Clinical Mod- els Program. [cited 30th December 2014] . Available from: http://openehr.org/programs/ clinicalmodels/.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Abraham J, Kannampallil TG, Patel VL. Bridging gaps in handoffs: A continuity of care based approach.. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2012; 45 (02) 240-254.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Raduma-Tomàs MA, Flin R, Yule S, Close S. The importance of preparation for doctors’ handovers in an acute medical assessment unit: a hierarchical task analysis.. BMJ Qual Saf 2012; 21 (03) 211-217.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Card SK, Mackinlay JD, Shneiderman B.. Readings in information visualization: using vision to think. San Francisco, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann; 1999: 686.
  Google Scholar
• 21 Ware C. Information visualization: perception for design.. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman; 2004: 486.
  Google Scholar
• 22 Wertheimer M. Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt.. Psychologische Forschung: Zeitschrift für Psychologie und ihre Grenzwissenschaften. 1923; 4: 301-350.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Wagemans J, Elder JH, Kubovy M, Palmer SE, Peterson MA, Singh M, von der Heydt R. A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception I. Perceptual Grouping and Figure-Ground Organization.. Psychol Bull 2012; 138 (06) 1172-1217.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Wagemans J, Feldman J, Gepshtein S, Kimchi R, Pomerantz JR, van der Helm PA, van Leeuwen C. A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: II. Conceptual and theoretical foundations.. Psychol Bull 2012; 138 (06) 1218-1252.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Shneiderman B.. The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, 1996 Proceedings 1996: 336-343.
  Google Scholar
• 26 Cockburn A, Karlson A, Bederson BB. A review of overview+detail, zooming, and focus+context interfaces.. ACM Comput Surv 2009; 41 (01) 2:1-2:31.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Perlin K, Fox D. Pad: An Alternative Approach to the Computer Interface. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques.. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 1993: 57-64.
  Google Scholar
• 28 Hertzum M, Simonsen J. Positive effects of electronic patient records on three clinical activities.. Int J Med Inform 2008; 77 (012) 809-817.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Gediga G, Hamborg K-C. Düntsch I. The IsoMetrics usability inventory: An operationalization of ISO 9241-10.. supporting summative and formative evaluation of software systems. Behaviour & Information Technology 1999; 18 (03) 151-164.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Hamborg K, Vehse B, Bludau H. Questionnaire Based Usability Evaluation of Hospital Information Systems.. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation 2004; 7 (01) 21-30.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Hassenzahl M, Burmester DM, Koller F. AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In: Szwillus G, Ziegler J. editors. Mensch &Computer 2003. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag 2003: 187-196. Questionnaire available at: www. attrakDiff.de.
  Google Scholar
• 32 Hassenzahl M, Burmester M, Koller F. Der User Experience (UX) auf der Spur: Zum Einsatz von. www.attrakdiff.de In: Brau H, Diefenbach S, Hassenzahl M, Koller F, Peissner M, Röse K. editors. Usability Professionals 2008. Stuttgart: German Chapter der Usability Professionals Association; 2008: 78-82.
  Google Scholar
• 33 Tolman EC. Cognitive maps in rats and men.. Psychol Rev 1948; 55 (04) 189-208.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Baddeley A. Working Memory: Theories, Models, and Controversies.. Annual Review of Psychology 2012; 63 (01) 1-29.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Saleem JJ, Flanagan ME, Wilck NR, Demetriades J, Doebbeling BN. The next-generation electronic health record: perspectives of key leaders from the US Department of Veterans Affairs.. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 e1 e175-7.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Keenan G, Yakel E, Lopez KD, Tschannen D, Ford YB. Challenges to nurses’ efforts of retrieving, documenting, and communicating patient care information.. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20 (02) 245-251.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Pretz JE, Folse VN. Nursing experience and preference for intuition in decision making.. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2011; 20 (19-20) 2878-2889.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Galliers J, Wilson S, Randell R, Woodward P. Safe use of symbols in handover documentation for medical teams.. Behaviour & Information Technology 2011; 30: 499-506.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Evensmoen HR, Ladstein J, Hansen TI, Møller JA, Witter MP, Nadel L, Håberg AK. From details to large scale: The representation of environ- mental positions follows a granularity gradient along the human hippocampal and entorhinal anterior-posterior axis.. Hippocampus 2015; 25 (01) 119-135.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Wikenheiser AM, Redish AD. Decoding the cognitive map: ensemble hippocampal sequences and decision making.. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2015; 32: 8-15.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 41 Arnold AE 1, Burles F, Krivoruchko T, Liu I, Rey CD, Levy RM, Iaria G. Cognitive mapping in humans and its relationship to other orientation skills.. Exp Brain Res 2013; 224 (03) 359-372.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Axelrod RM. Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ Pr; 1976: 404.
  Google Scholar
• 43 Eden C. Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems.. European Journal of Operational Research 2004; 159 (03) 673-686.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 44 Langfield-Smith K. Exploring the need for a shared cognitive map.. Journal of Management Studies 1992; 29 (03) 349-368.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Vanwindekens FM, Stilmant D, Baret PV. Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social- ecological systems.. Ecological Modelling 2013; 250: 352-362.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Rind A, Wang TD, Aigner W, Miksch S, Wongsuphasawat K, Plaisant C. et al. Interactive Information Visualization to Explore and Query Electronic Health Records.. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 2013; 5 (03) 207-298.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Plaisant C, Milash B, Rose A, Widoff S, Shneiderman B. LifeLines: Visualizing Personal Histories. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.. New York, NY: USA ACM; 1996: 221-227.
  Google Scholar
• 48 Klimov D, Shahar Y, Taieb-Maimon M. Intelligent interactive visual exploration of temporal associations among multiple time-oriented patient records.. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48 (03) 254-262.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 49 West VL, Borland D, Hammond WE. Innovative information visualization of electronic health record data: a systematic review.. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2015; 22 (02) 330-339.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 50 Weed LL. Medical records that guide and teach.. N Engl J Med. 1968; 278 (012) 652-657.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 51 Field TS, Tjia J, Mazor KM, Donovan JL, Kanaan AO, Harrold LR. et al. Randomized Trial of a Warfarin Communication Protocol for Nursing Homes: an SBAR-based Approach.. The American Journal of Medicine 2011; 124 (02) 179.e1-179.e7.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 52 Lamond D. The information content of the nurse change of shift report: a comparative study.. J Adv Nurs 2000; 31 (04) 794-804.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 53 Dowding D. Examining the effects that manipulating information given in the change of shift report has on nurses’ care planning ability.. J Adv Nurs 2001; 33 (06) 836-846.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 54 Lazar DJ, Feng DJH, Hochheiser DH. Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction.. John Wiley & Sons; 2010: 447.
  Google Scholar
• 55 Collins SA, Stein DM, Vawdrey DK, Stetson PD, Bakken S. Content overlap in nurse and physician handoff artifacts and the potential role of electronic health records: A systematic review.. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2011; 44 (04) 704-712.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 56 O’Donnell AM, Dansereau DF, Hall RH. Knowledge Maps as Scaffolds for Cognitive Processing.. Educational Psychology Review 2002; 14 (01) 71-86.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 57 Fine MS, Minnery BS. Visual Salience Affects Performance in a Working Memory Task.. J Neurosci 2009; 29 (025) 8016-8021.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 58 Santangelo V, Macaluso E. Visual Salience Improves Spatial Working Memory via Enhanced Parieto-Temporal Functional Connectivity.. J Neurosci 2013; 33 (09) 4110-4117.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 59 Pooresmaeili A, Bach DR, Dolan RJ. The effect of visual salience on memory-based choices.. Journal of Neurophysiology 2014; 111 (03) 481-487.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 60 Bermúdez JL. Cognitive Science: An Introduction to the Science of the Mind. 1st ed.. Cambridge University Press: 2010: 555.
  Google Scholar
• 61 Preim B. Interaktive Systeme: Band 1: Grundlagen, Graphical User Interfaces, Informationsvisualisierung. Dachselt R, editor.. Berlin, Heidel- berg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2010: 628.
  Google Scholar
• 62 Sperling G. The information available in brief visual presentations.. Psychological monographs: General and applied 1960; 74 (011) 1.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 63 Baddeley A. The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000; 4 (011) 417-423.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 64 Nyamsuren E, Taatgen NA.. The Effect of Visual Representation Style in Problem-Solving: A Perspective from Cognitive Processes. PLoS One [Internet]. 2013 Nov 15 [cited 2015 February 24] . 8. 11 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3829871/.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 65 Ahmed A, Chandra S, Herasevich V, Gajic O, Pickering BW. The effect of two different electronic health record user interfaces on intensive care provider task load, errors of cognition, and performance.. Crit Care Med 2011; 39 (07) 1626-1634.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 66 Bates KE, Bird GL, Shea JA, Apkon M, Shaddy RE, Metlay JP. A tool to measure shared clinical understanding following handoffs to help evaluate handoff quality.. J Hosp Med 2014; 9 (03) 142-147.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 67 Horwitz LI, Rand D, Staisiunas P, Van Ness PH, Araujo KLB, Banerjee SS. et al. Development of a handoff evaluation tool for shift-to-shift physician handoffs: the Handoff CEX.. J Hosp Med 2013; 8 (04) 191-200.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 68 O’Connell B, Ockerby C, Hawkins M. Construct validity and reliability of the Handover Evaluation Scale.. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2014; 23 (3-4) 560-570.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar