The page or information you have requested is intended for an audience outside the United States. By continuing to browse you confirm that you are a non-US resident requesting access to this page or information.

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you consent to using cookies. For more information about cookies and how we use them, please see our Privacy Policy.

New study shows mechanical ventilator SERVO-U outperforms competitors on use safety and user experience

01/09/2016

As stated in the study* ventilators are a fundamental technology in critical care, with their use expected to increase in demand in the next ten years. But the design complexity of mechanical ventilators can also lead to patient harm and negatively affect user performance through poor user interfaces, interaction modes, or difficulties during the physical setup of equipment.

The study is one of the largest to evaluate several critical care ventilators on safety and user experience. It enrolled 48 respiratory therapists and faced them with a number of primary operating functions in a series of clinical scenarios. The main results show that the SERVO-U® ventilator outperformed other ventilators in seven out of nine comparisons on use safety, perceived usability and workload. As stated in the study differences in outcomes may be explained by interaction design, quality of hardware components used in manufacturing, and influence of consumer product technology on users’ expectations.

How SERVO-U compares to other ventilators
(Only statistically significant results are presented)

  Safer
(Observed UE/CC)
Better perceived usability
(PSSUQ)
Lower workload
(NASA-TLX)

SERVO-U compared to Hamilton G5

SERVO-U

SERVO-U

 

SERVO-U compared to Puritan Bennet PB980

 

SERVO-U

SERVO-U

SERVO-U compared to Dräger V500

SERVO-U

SERVO-U

SERVO-U

UE/CC use error/close call, PSSUQ Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire, NASA-TLX National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index. The table is based on table 2 in study.

The study can also be a guide for healthcare professionals interested in learning how to evaluate medical devices in terms of safety and user experience. “We believe evaluations of this rigor are required to improve medical product design for excellence in user experience and safety rather than simply stating products are not likely to harm,” says Joseph Cafazzo PhD PEng senior author of the study and Executive Director of Healthcare Human Factors, University Health Network, Associate Professor, University of Toronto.

Read the full study on the Critical Care website

Read more about SERVO-U mechanical ventilator

* Morita et al. The usability of ventilators: a comparative evaluation of use safety and user experience Crit Care (2016) 20:263.