Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review

Background: Management of mental workload is a key aspect of safety in anaesthesia but there is no gold standard tool to assess mental workload, risking confusion in clinical and research use of such tools. Objective: This review assessed currently used mental workload assessment tools. Method...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Almghairbi, Dalal S., Marufu, Takawira C., Moppett, Iain K.
Format: Article
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/50039/
_version_ 1848798136546361344
author Almghairbi, Dalal S.
Marufu, Takawira C.
Moppett, Iain K.
author_facet Almghairbi, Dalal S.
Marufu, Takawira C.
Moppett, Iain K.
author_sort Almghairbi, Dalal S.
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description Background: Management of mental workload is a key aspect of safety in anaesthesia but there is no gold standard tool to assess mental workload, risking confusion in clinical and research use of such tools. Objective: This review assessed currently used mental workload assessment tools. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on the following electronic databases; Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Web of Science. Screening and data extraction were performed individually by two authors. We included primary published papers focusing on mental workload assessment tools in anaesthesia. Results: A total of 2331 studies were screened by title, 32 at full text and twenty - four studies met the inclusion criteria. Six mental workload measurement tools were observed across included studies. Reliability for the Borg rating scales and Vibrotactile device were reported in two individual studies. The rest of the studies did not record reliability of the tool measurements used. Borg rating scales, NASA-TLX and task oriented mental work load measurements are subjective, easily available, readily accessible and takes a few minutes to complete. However, the Vibrotactile and Eye-tracking methods are objective, require more technical involvement, considerable time for the investigator, and moderately expensive, impacting their potential use. Conclusion: We found that, the measurement of mental workload in anaesthesia is an emerging field supporting patient and anaesthetist safety. The self - reported measures have the best evidence base
first_indexed 2025-11-14T20:14:58Z
format Article
id nottingham-50039
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T20:14:58Z
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-500392020-05-04T19:47:31Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/50039/ Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review Almghairbi, Dalal S. Marufu, Takawira C. Moppett, Iain K. Background: Management of mental workload is a key aspect of safety in anaesthesia but there is no gold standard tool to assess mental workload, risking confusion in clinical and research use of such tools. Objective: This review assessed currently used mental workload assessment tools. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on the following electronic databases; Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Web of Science. Screening and data extraction were performed individually by two authors. We included primary published papers focusing on mental workload assessment tools in anaesthesia. Results: A total of 2331 studies were screened by title, 32 at full text and twenty - four studies met the inclusion criteria. Six mental workload measurement tools were observed across included studies. Reliability for the Borg rating scales and Vibrotactile device were reported in two individual studies. The rest of the studies did not record reliability of the tool measurements used. Borg rating scales, NASA-TLX and task oriented mental work load measurements are subjective, easily available, readily accessible and takes a few minutes to complete. However, the Vibrotactile and Eye-tracking methods are objective, require more technical involvement, considerable time for the investigator, and moderately expensive, impacting their potential use. Conclusion: We found that, the measurement of mental workload in anaesthesia is an emerging field supporting patient and anaesthetist safety. The self - reported measures have the best evidence base BMJ Publishing Group 2018-07-31 Article PeerReviewed Almghairbi, Dalal S., Marufu, Takawira C. and Moppett, Iain K. (2018) Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review. BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning, 4 (3). pp. 112-116. ISSN 2056-6697 Workload; Over load; Anaesthesia; Anaesthetist http://stel.bmj.com/content/early/2018/03/21/bmjstel-2017-000263 doi:10.1136/bmjstel-2017-000263 doi:10.1136/bmjstel-2017-000263
spellingShingle Workload; Over load; Anaesthesia; Anaesthetist
Almghairbi, Dalal S.
Marufu, Takawira C.
Moppett, Iain K.
Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
title Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
title_full Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
title_fullStr Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
title_short Anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
title_sort anaesthesia workload measurement devices: qualitative systematic review
topic Workload; Over load; Anaesthesia; Anaesthetist
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/50039/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/50039/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/50039/