Auditory and visual alarm designs impact clinicians’ perceived cognitive workload
Authors' conclusion
Our findings suggest modifications to both visual and auditory alarms can reduce elements of perceived cognitive workload, especially temporal demand, while preserving clinician performance without deterioration of other measured components.
Study context
- Population
- Clinicians (nurse practitioners, residents, fellows) identifying simulated mean arterial pressure (MAP) alarms, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), March–September 2023
- Participants
- 26 clinicians
- Comparison
- Modified vs standard visual and auditory MAP alarms
- Cliniciansn = 26
- Outcome
- Perceived workload (NASA-TLX, 6 domains, 1-20 Likert scale, higher = greater workload)
- Follow-up
- After each trial
Methodological detailssimulation, single-centre, Auditory trials: 15 clinicians and non-clinicians; Wilcoxon signed-rank and rank-sum tests
- Simulation
- Single-centre
- Auditory trials: 15 clinicians and non-clinicians; Wilcoxon signed-rank and rank-sum tests
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Temporal demand, visual trials (clinicians)
Modified
8.0
median · IQR 4.2–11.8
Conventional
13.0
median · IQR 6.5–16.0
P = 0.022
Further findings
Median
| Outcome | Clinicians | Non-clinicians | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived performance, conventional auditory alarmsSignificantly higher in clinicians | 10.0 (IQR 5.0–13.0) | 4.0 (IQR 2.0–9.0) | P = 0.022 |
| Temporal demand, conventional auditory alarmsHigher in non-clinicians | 2.5 (IQR 1.0–5.0) | 6.0 (IQR 3.0–10.0) | P = 0.024 |
Original publication
Auditory and visual alarm designs impact clinicians’ perceived cognitive workload. J Clin Monit Comput. Published 2 September 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →