跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT06245044
NCT06245044已完成不适用

Preventing Medication Dispensing Errors in Pharmacy Practice With Interpretable Machine Intelligence

University of Michigan2 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 68 人开始时间: 2024年4月11日最近更新:
适应症

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
入组人数
68
试验地点
2
主要终点
Reaction Time

研究概览

简要总结

Pharmacists currently perform an independent double-check to identify drug-selection errors before they can reach the patient. However, the use of machine intelligence (MI) to support this cognitive decision-making work by pharmacists does not exist in practice. This research is being conducted to examine the effectiveness of the timing of machine intelligence (MI) advice on to determine if it results in lower task time, increased accuracy, and increased trust in the MI.

详细描述

Pharmacists currently perform an independent double-check currently to identify drug-selection errors before they can reach the patient. However, the use of machine intelligence (MI) to support this cognitive decision-making work by pharmacists does not exist in practice. Instead, pharmacists rely solely on reference images of the medication which they can compare to the prescription vial contents. Previous research has shown that decision support systems can effectively improve healthcare delivery efficiency and accuracy, while preventing adverse drug events. However, little is known about how MI technologies impact pharmacists' work performance and cognitive demand.

To facilitate the long-term symbiotic relationship between the pharmacists and the MI system, proper trust needs to be established. While trust has been identified as the central factor for effective human-machine teaming, issues arise when humans place unjustified trust in automated technologies do not place enough trust in them. Over trust in automation can lead to complacency and automation bias. For instance, the pharmacists may rely on the MI system to the extent that they blindly accept any recommendation by the system. Under trust can result in pharmacist disuse and potential abandonment of the MI system.

Furthermore, little is known about the timing of the MI advice on pharmacists' work performance. For example, showing the MI's advice while the pharmacist is performing the medication verification task may yield different results than showing the MI's advice after the pharmacist made their decision.

The study investigators have developed a MI system for medication images classification. The objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of the timing of MI advice to determine if it results in lower task time, increased accuracy, and increased trust in the MI.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Crossover
主要目的
Other
盲法
None

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Licensed pharmacist in the United States
  • Age 18 years and older at screening
  • PC/Laptop with Microsoft Windows 10 or Mac (Macbook, iMac) with MacOS with Google Chrome, Edge, Opera, Safari, or Firefox web browser installed on the device
  • Screen resolution of 1024x968 pixels or more
  • A laptop integrated webcam or USB webcam is also required for the eye tracking purpose.

排除标准

  • Participated in Wave 1 or Wave 2
  • Eyeglasses
  • Uncorrected cataracts, intraocular implants, glaucoma, or permanently dilated pupil
  • Require a screen reader/magnifier or other assistive technology to use the computer
  • Eye movement or alignment abnormalities (lazy eye, strabismus, nystagmus)

结局指标

主要结局

Reaction Time

时间窗: Throughout the verification task

Difference in task time measured by the number of seconds from starting the task to accepting or rejecting a medication image

Decision Accuracy

时间窗: Throughout the verification task

Difference in detection rate measured by the number of medication verification errors across all participants in the Arm/Group.

Trust Change

时间窗: After every trial in Scenarios 1 and 2

Participants will complete 100 mock medication verification trials in each of the study arms (i.e., Scenario 1, Scenario 2, and No Help). After each trial in Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, participants will use a visual analog scale (VAS) to respond to the question: "How much do you trust the AI advice?" The endpoints of the 100-point VAS are 'Not at all' to 'Completely trust'. Participants indicate their level of trust in the MI advice after every trial on a scale from 1-100, with higher scores indicating greater levels of trust. The trust change, as measured by the visual analog scale, will be calculated using the following formula: Trust change (i) = Trust(i) - Trust(i - 1), where i=2, 3, ..., 100. To compute a single, summarized value for the Trust Change variable within a specific scenario, the individual Trust Change scores measured from the trials are averaged. This averaging method provides a comprehensive measure of how trust shifted across the duration of the scenario.

Trust

时间窗: Post-intervention in Scenarios 1 and 2.

Trust will be assessed using the Muir \& Moray's (1996) Trust in Automation scale. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating greater levels of trust.

次要结局

  • Cognitive Effort(Throughout the verification task)
  • Workload(After completing 100 mock verification trials in each arm)
  • Usability(After completing 100 mock verification trials in each arm)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Principal Investigator
主要研究者

Corey Lester

Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacy

University of Michigan

研究点 (2)

Loading locations...

相似试验