Dual-Screen Monitors: A Qualitative Analysis of Their Use in an Academic Library

Russell, Susan E.; Wong, Katherine

doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2005.08.009

“…Although no studies were found in the area of the hospital Archiving Department, we found relevant studies in other fields; for example, academic libraries (Russell & Wong 2005), software development (Czerwinski et al 2003;Hutchings Note: Throughout this paper the Canadian term 'Archivist' is used. In other countries, including Australia, the correct term is 'Clinical Coder'.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Dual vs. Single Computer Monitor in a Canadian Hospital Archiving Department: A Study of Efficiency and Satisfaction

Poder¹,

Godbout²,

Bellemare

³

2011

HIM J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a comparative study of clinical coding by Archivists (also known as Clinical Coders in some other countries) using single and dual computer monitors. In the present context, processing a record corresponds to checking the available information; searching for the missing physician information; and finally, performing clinical coding. We collected data for each Archivist during her use of the single monitor for 40 hours and during her use of the dual monitor for 20 hours. During the experimental periods, Archivists did not perform other related duties, so we were able to measure the real-time processing of records. To control for the type of records and their impact on the process time required, we categorised the cases as major or minor, based on whether acute care or day surgery was involved. Overall results show that 1,234 records were processed using a single monitor and 647 records using a dual monitor. The time required to process a record was significantly higher (p= .071) with a single monitor compared to a dual monitor (19.83 vs.18.73 minutes). However, the percentage of major cases was significantly higher (p= .000) in the single monitor group compared to the dual monitor group (78% vs. 69%). As a consequence, we adjusted our results, which reduced the difference in time required to process a record between the two systems from 1.1 to 0.61 minutes. Thus, the net real-time difference was only 37 seconds in favour of the dual monitor system. Extrapolated over a 5-year period, this would represent a time savings of 3.1% and generate a net cost savings of $7,729 CAD (Canadian dollars) for each workstation that devoted 35 hours per week to the processing of records. Finally, satisfaction questionnaire responses indicated a high level of satisfaction and support for the dual-monitor system. The implementation of a dual-monitor system in a hospital archiving department is an efficient option in the context of scarce human resources and has the strong support of Archivists.

show abstract

“…Therefore, a single 19-inch monitor work area served as a baseline condition A for comparison with the multiscreen conditions. Several studies have found increased performance for dual-screen users (Anderson et al, 2004;Poder, Godbout & Bellemare, 2011;Russell & Wong, 2005); a dual screen set up is part of condition. The dual-screens were fixed on the horizontal plane from the user's perspective since varying screen position by depth was found to result in a performance decrement (Tan & Czerwinski, 2003).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There exists a large body of human-computer interaction (HCI) literature on the use of multiple screens, screen sizes, and form factors (e.g., desktop, tablet, smartphone). Previous studies in academic (Anderson et al, 2004;Russell & Wong, 2005) and hospital (Poder, Godbout & Bellemare, 2011) settings have demonstrated that performance is improved with the use of two monitors compared to one. For example, participants were quicker on tasks, did the work faster, and performed more work with fewer errors in multiscreen (dual screen) configurations than with a single screen (Anderson et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance, workload, and usability in a multiscreen, multi-device, information-rich environment

Saleem

¹

,

Weiler

²

2018

PeerJ Computer Science

5

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential benefits of multiscreen and multiple device environments were assessed using three different computing environments. A single factor, within-subject study was conducted with 18 engineering students in a laboratory experiment. Three levels for the computing environment factor included one with a desktop computer with a single monitor (control, condition A); one with a desktop with dual monitors, as well as a single tablet computer (condition B); and one with a desktop with a single monitor, as well as two tablet computers (condition C). There was no statistically significant difference in efficiency or workload when completing scenarios for the three computing environments. However, a dual monitor desktop with a single tablet computer (B) was the ideal computing environment for the information-rich engineering problem given to participants, supported by significantly fewer errors compared to condition C and significantly higher usability ratings compared to conditions A and C. A single desktop monitor with two tablet computers (C) did not provide any advantage compared to a single desktop monitor (A).

show abstract

“…Therefore, a single 19-inch monitor work area served as a baseline condition (A) for comparison with the multiscreen conditions. Several studies have found increased performance for dual-screen users (Anderson et al, 2004;Poder et al, 2011;Russell & Wong, 2005); a dual screen set up is part of condition (B). The dual-screens were fixed on the horizontal plane from the user's perspective since varying screen position by depth was found to result in a performance decrement (Tan & Czerwinski, 2003).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There exists a large body of human-computer interaction (HCI) literature on the use of multiple screens, screen sizes, and form factors (e.g., desktop, tablet, smartphone). Previous studies in academic (Anderson, Colvin, Tobler, & Lindsay, 2004;Russell & Wong, 2005) and hospital (Poder, Godbout, & Bellemare, 2011) settings have demonstrated that performance is improved with the use of two monitors compared to one. For example, participants were quicker on tasks, did the work faster, and performed more work with fewer errors in multiscreen (dual screen) configurations than with a single screen (Anderson et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Untitled

Supplemental Information 3: Appendix B - Flow Process Chart, Jackman

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential benefits of multiscreen and multiple device environments were assessed using three different computing environments. A single factor, within-subject study was conducted with 18 engineering students in a laboratory experiment. Three levels for the computing environment factor included one with a desktop computer with a single monitor (control, condition A); one with a desktop with dual monitors, as well as a single tablet computer (condition B); and one with a desktop with a single monitor, as well as two tablet computers (condition C). There was no statistically significant difference in efficiency or workload when completing scenarios for the three computing environments. However, a dual monitor desktop with a single tablet computer (B) was the ideal computing environment for the information-rich engineering problem given to participants, supported by significantly fewer errors compared to condition C and significantly higher usability ratings compared to conditions A and C. A single desktop monitor with two tablet computers (C) did not provide any advantage compared to a single desktop monitor (A).

show abstract

Dual-Screen Monitors: A Qualitative Analysis of Their Use in an Academic Library

Cited by 11 publications

References 11 publications

Dual vs. Single Computer Monitor in a Canadian Hospital Archiving Department: A Study of Efficiency and Satisfaction

Dual vs. Single Computer Monitor in a Canadian Hospital Archiving Department: A Study of Efficiency and Satisfaction

Performance, workload, and usability in a multiscreen, multi-device, information-rich environment

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About