Designing a Faceshield
Designing, Prototyping & Testing a Faceshield
Healthcare | Mixed-Methods-Research |
Human-Centered-Design | Rapid-Prototyping
Description
We iteratively designed a new faceshield during the COVID pandemic that improved on the major usability issues faced by healthcare workers at Carilion Clinic, a large hospital system in Roanoke, Virginia. My role was to use Human Factors and UXR methods to obtain valuable feedback between each design phase. Feedback showed that we reduced pressure, and fogging, improved ventilation, and increased the freedom of movement for users.
Final design with flip-up mechanism
Existing Faceshields have many usability issues
Background
COVID-19 meant that healthcare workers wore face shields for long periods
They were uncomfortable and hard to keep on for long
Supply chain issues made it hard to access faceshields
Hospital Innovation, Human Factors teams as well as Engineers from Virginia Tech were tasked in identifying a solution to these problems
Goals
PRUSA 3D printer
Design a faceshield that promotes comfort and decreases workplace exposures.
Determine usability issues with current face shields
Develop design criteria for a prototype
Use an iterative human-centered design approach to design and deploy a faceshield that maximizes comfort, ease of use & perceptions of safety
Method
We used a multi-phase design cycle that closely followed Human Centered Design principles
A total of 4 phases that included one major exploration phase identifying design criteria and, 3 design & evaluation phases
New designs were rapidly prototyped using a 3D printer
Phase I: Survey of Existing Faceshields
Identify Major Design Criteria & Major Usability Issues using,
A hospital-wide survey that helped identify major usability issues with existing faceshields & design criteria for new faceshields.
Quantitative Analysis: MANOVA of Likert responses to the survey
Qualitative Analysis: Thematic Analysis of survey responses
MANOVA showed that not one of the Faceshield used was significantly preferred by participants. Comfort & Preference scores were also low.
Phase II: Designing, Prototype & Evaluate Cycle
Phase II Design
A new faceshield design was given to frontline healthcare workers
Participants were divided into two groups: Control & Intervention
Participants were asked to rate the usability using a SUS Survey
They were also asked to fill a survey daily for a week which ended with a focus group session
The new design was highly usable in comparison to the control
All the major issues reported showed fewer occurrences of usability issues in the new design when compared to the old design.
Comfort and Safety were rated better for the new design.
Phase III: Further design iterations
Feedback from Phase II was used to redesign the faceshield
A cover was added above the forehead to reduce exposure risk
The plastic sheet size was adjusted to prevent the shield from hitting the shoulder when turning the head
Phase III Design
Phase IV: Final Design
The top cover was split into two pieces following feedback about headaches caused by it
General feedback from the final group of participants was excellent and the new design was preferred by participants in general
They also took it off less often
Phase IV Design
Phase IV Design Side Profile
Summary
We identified design requirements for faceshield usability and iteratively designed prototypes
Used quantitative and qualitative analysis to identify key elements of usability, and design criteria
Iterative prototyping for fast turnover of designs helped us make an impact during the COVID pandemic
Usability & Feedback of the design was positive
Participants took the faceshield off less often
User Guide Design for our Healthcare Workers
Collaborators
Carilion Clinic Human Factors | Carilion Clinic Innovations | Virginia Tech
Year
2020-21
Additional Info
Kurtz, C. E., Peng, Y., Jesso, M., Sanghavi, H., Kuehl, D. R., & Parker, S. H. (2022). Using a human factors-centric approach to development and testing of a face shield designed for health care workers: A COVID-19 case study for process and outcomes. American journal of infection control, 50(3), 306-311. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2021.10.033