Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inattention blindness in surgery

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Inattention blindness (IB) can be defined as the failure to perceive an unexpected object when attention is focussed on another object or task. The principal aim of this study was to determine the effect of cognitive load and surgical image guidance on operative IB.

Methods

Using a randomised control study design, participants were allocated to a high or low cognitive load group and subsequently to one of three augmented reality (AR) image guidance groups (no guidance, wireframe overlay and solid overlay). Randomised participants watched a segment of video from a robotic partial nephrectomy. Those in the high cognitive load groups were asked to keep a count of instrument movements, while those in the low cognitive load groups were only asked to watch the video. Two foreign bodies were visible within the operative scene: a swab, within the periphery of vision; and a suture, in the centre of the operative scene. Once the participants had finished watching the video, they were asked to report whether they had observed a swab or suture.

Results

The overall level of prompted inattention blindness was 74 and 10 % for the swab and suture, respectively. Significantly higher levels of IB for the swab were seen in the high versus the low cognitive load groups, but not for the suture (8 vs. 47 %, p < 0.001 and 90 vs. 91 %, p = 1.000, for swab and suture, respectively). No significant difference was seen between image guidance groups for attention of the swab or suture (29 vs. 20 %, p = 0.520 and 22 vs. 22 %, p = 1.000, respectively).

Conclusions

The overall effect of IB on operative practice appeared to be significant, within the context of this study. When examining for the effects of AR image guidance and cognitive load on IB, only the latter was found to have significance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mack A, Rock I (1998) Inattentional blindness, 1st edn. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  2. Simons DJ, Chabris CF (1999) Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28:1059–1074

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dixon BJ, Daly MJ, Chan H, Vescan AD, Witterick IJ, Irish JC (2013) Surgeons blinded by enhanced navigation: the effect of augmented reality on attention. Surg Endosc 27:454–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Williams LJ (1982) Cognitive load and the functional field of view. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 24:683–692

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fadden S, Wickens CD, Vevers P (2000) Costs and benefits of head up displays: an attention perspective and a meta analysis. World Aviat Congr

  6. Fischer E, Haines R (1980) Cognitive issues in head-up displays. NASA Tech Pap 1711

  7. Mccann RS, Foyle DC (1993) Attentional limitations with heads up displays. In: Jensen R (ed) Proceedings of Seventh International Symposium. Aviat Psychol. pp 70–75

  8. Cartwright-Finch U, Lavie N (2007) The role of perceptual load in inattentional blindness. Cognition 102:321–340. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2006.01.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hughes-Hallett A, Mayer EK, Marcus HJ, Cundy TP, Pratt PJ, Parston G, Vale J, Darzi AW (2014) Quantifying innovation in surgery. Ann Surg 260:205–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pratt P, Mayer E, Vale J, Cohen D, Edwards E, Darzi A, Yang G-Z (2012) An effective visualisation and registration system for image-guided robotic partial nephrectomy. J Robot Surg 6:23–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hart S, Staveland L (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock A, Meshkati N (eds) Human Mental Workload. North Holland Press, Amsterdam, pp 139–183

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Healey AN, Sevdalis N, Vincent CA (2006) Measuring intra-operative interference from distraction and interruption observed in the operating theatre. Ergonomics 49:589–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Guru KA, Esfahani ET, Raza SJ, Bhat R, Wang K, Hammond Y, Wilding G, Peabody JO, Chowriappa AJ (2014) Cognitive skills assessment during robot-assisted surgery: separating wheat from chaff. BJU Int 115:166–174

  14. Wickens CD, Alexander AL (2009) Attentional tunneling and task management in synthetic vision displays. Int J Aviat Psychol 19:182–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu D, Jenkins SA, Sanderson PM, Watson MO, Leane T, Kruys A, Russell WJ (2009) Monitoring with head-mounted displays: performance and safety in a full-scale simulator and part-task trainer. Anesth Analg 109:1135–1146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bressan P, Pizzighello S (2008) The attentional cost of inattentional blindness. Cognition 106:370–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lavie N (2005) Distracted and confused?: selective attention under load. Trends Cogn Sci 9:75–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Archie Hughes-Hallett, Erik Mayer, Hani Marcus, Philip Pratt, Sam Mason, Ara Darzi, and Justin Vale have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, St Mary’s Hospital Campus, London, W2 1NY, UK

    Archie Hughes-Hallett, Erik K. Mayer, Hani J. Marcus, Sam Mason, Ara W. Darzi & Justin A. Vale

  2. Hamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK

    Hani J. Marcus, Philip Pratt & Ara W. Darzi

Authors
  1. Archie Hughes-Hallett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik K. Mayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hani J. Marcus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philip Pratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sam Mason
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ara W. Darzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Justin A. Vale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Archie Hughes-Hallett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hughes-Hallett, A., Mayer, E.K., Marcus, H.J. et al. Inattention blindness in surgery. Surg Endosc 29, 3184–3189 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-4051-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-4051-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation