A definition of quality may differ according to the observers standpoint

and numerous performance measures may contribute to overall quality. Patients, surgeons, anaesthetic assistants, recovery nurses, managers, and anaesthetic peers are each likely to have their own perspective on oanaesthetic quality’ and would perhaps suggest different metrics to measure it. Speed, efficiency, cost, interpersonal skills, complication rates, patient recorded outcome measures, and satisfaction are all valid as quality measures, but none alone captures anaesthetic quality. Performance data are frequently presented as single-dimension HIF cancer measurements (e.g. pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, patient satisfaction), but this does not address the fact that two or more domains may be closely related (e.g. use of regional anaesthesia and quality of analgesia) or in opposition (e.g. use of regional anaesthesia and speed).\n\nWe introduce the concept of a operformance polygon’ as a tool to represent multidimensional performance assessment. This method of data presentation encourages balanced appraisal of anaesthetic quality.\n\nPerformance polygons may be used to compare individual performance with peers, published outcome norms, trends in performance over time, to explore aspects of team performance and potentially capture data that are required for

medical revalidation.\n\nPerformance polygons enable easy comparison with any relevant data set and are a visual tool that potentially has wider applications in healthcare

quality Compound high throughput screening improvement.”
“The search task of Luck, Hillyard, Mangun and Gazzaniga (1989) was optimised to test for the presence of a bilateral field advantage in the visual search capabilities of normal subjects. The modified design used geometrically regular arrays of 2, 4 or 8 items restricted to hemifields delineated by the vertical or horizontal meridian; the target, if present, appeared at one of two fixed positions per quadrant at an eccentricity of 11 deg. Group and individual performance data 17DMAG manufacturer were analysed in terms of the slope of response time against display-size functions (‘RT slope’). Averaging performance across all conditions save display mode (bilateral vs. unilateral) revealed a significant bilateral advantage in the form of a 21% increase in apparent item scanning speed for target detection; in the absence of a target, bilateral displays gave a 5% increase in speed that was not significant. Factor analysis by ANOVA confirmed this main effect of display mode, and also revealed several higher order interactions with display geometry, indicating that the bilateral advantage was masked at certain target positions by a crowding-like effect.\n\nIn a numerical model of search efficiency (i.e.