Table 2.

The major topics with participant count, percentages, and examples (N=36)

Major topic	Examples
Positive design features (29 participants, 81%)	Participant #15: Intuitive kind of presentation. Participant #7: Clear presentation, no unnecessary information to distract. Participant #1: Obviously, something like this was missing.
Facilitates decision making (17 participants, 47%)	Participant #19: Creates clarity in emergency situations. Participant #30: Perceived diagnostic confidence is higher.
Saves cognitive resources (15 participants, 42%)	Participant #9: Don’t have to think as much as with conventional ROTEM. Participant #16: Couldn’t imagine, that it could be presented in such a simple way!
Easy to learn (14 participants, 39%)	Participant #05: Even without extensive previous education. Participant #33: Easy. Self-explaining. Participant #13: Fast learning.
Accelerates treatment (13 participants, 36%)	Participant #19: You can see immediately where the problem is. Participant #24: Quickly realize what the problem is. Participant #26: Faster with the Visual Clot. Participant #30: You get the answer much faster.
User groups (9 participants, 25%)	Participant #25: Can be used safely by all educational levels.
Quantification not made (17 participants, 47%)	Participant #14: No quantitative data or information.
Negative design features (17 participants, 47%)	Participant #22: Missing fibrin is not detected and understood easily. Participant #23: Heparin effect is a little tricky to interpret.