Impact of integrated graphical display on expert and novice diagnostic performance in critical care

Abstract

Abstract Objective To determine the impact of a graphical information display on diagnosing circulatory shock. Materials and Methods This was an experimental study comparing integrated and conventional information displays. Participants were intensivists or critical care fellows (experts) and first-year medical residents (novices). Results The integrated display was associated with higher performance (87% vs 82%; P < .001), less time (2.9 vs 3.5 min; P = .008), and more accurate etiology (67% vs 54%; P = .048) compared to the conventional display. When stratified by experience, novice physicians using the integrated display had higher performance (86% vs 69%; P < .001), less time (2.9 vs 3.7 min; P = .03), and more accurate etiology (65% vs 42%; P = .02); expert physicians using the integrated display had nonsignificantly improved performance (87% vs 82%; P = .09), time (2.9 vs 3.3; P = .28), and etiology (69% vs 67%; P = .81). Discussion The integrated display appeared to support efficient information processing, which resulted in more rapid and accurate circulatory shock diagnosis. Evidence more strongly supported a difference for novices, suggesting that graphical displays may help reduce expert–novice performance gaps.