[Evaluation of a new computerized recording system for preoperative assessment data]. / Evaluación de la puesta en marcha de un sistema de registro electrónico en la valoración preoperatoria de los pacientes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Little information is available on the use of computerized systems in preanesthetic assessment. Our aim was to evaluate staff acceptance of a computerized system for the structured recording of preoperative assessment data in our hospital. The time taken to complete the assessment was compared to the time usually taken to record the information on paper. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational, descriptive cross-sectional survey of user satisfaction 3 months after the system had been launched. We later carried out a prospective observational study of 796 preanesthetic assessment visits, comparing the mean time the users took to record information on paper to the time required to enter the data into the computer, analyzing differences between anesthesiologists and according to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification and patient age. RESULTS: A total of 401 paper records and 395 electronic files were included. The users believed that the computerized system improved quality and accessibility of recorded data and clinical decision-making. The time required to enter data into the computer was believed to be the main drawback; the users took a mean (SD) 15.21 (5.41) minutes to enter the electronic data and 13.37 (5.08) minutes to record the information on paper (P < .001). There were also significant differences in the time taken to record data according to ASA classification and between anesthesiologists (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In spite of drawbacks such as extra time taken to record electronic data, the users perceived benefits, such as improved quality and accessibility of records. For this reason, the computerized system was well accepted.

Evaluación de la puesta en marcha de un sistema de registro electrónico en la valoración preoperatoria de los pacientes / Evaluation of a new computerized recording system for preoperative assessment data

Objetivos: Existe escasa información sobre el empleo de sistemas de información electrónicos en la valoración preanestésica. Nuestro objetivo fue investigar la aceptación de un registro electrónico con entrada estructurada de datos para la evaluación preoperatoria desarrollado en nuestra institución. Se comparó el tiempo que se tardaba en completarlo frente al formato clásico escrito en papel. Material y métodos: Estudio observacional descriptivo transversal mediante un cuestionario de satisfacción entre los usuarios del sistema tres meses después de concluir el proceso de implantación. Posteriormente, realizamos un estudio observacional prospectivo sobre un total de 796 estudios preanestésicos, comparando la media del tiempo empleado en el registro en formato escrito en papel y formato electrónico, analizando la presencia de diferencias en función del anestesiólogo a cargo del estudio, de la clasificación de la Sociedad Americana de Anestesiología (ASA) y de la edad de los pacientes. Resultados: Se incluyeron 401 registros en papel y 395 en formato electrónico. Los usuarios consideraban que el sistema electrónico mejoraba la calidad y accesibilidad de los datos registrados y la toma de decisiones clínicas. El tiempo empleado en el registro fue percibido como el mayor inconveniente (15,21±5,41 minutos en formato electrónico frente a 13,37±5,08 minutos en papel; p<0,001). También encontramos diferencias significativas en el tiempo en función de la clasificación ASA y al anestesiólogo que efectuaba el registro (p<0,001). Conclusiones: A pesar de inconvenientes como el mayor tiempo de registro, los usuarios perciben beneficios como la mejora en la calidad y accesibilidad de la información registrada, lo que ha permitido un notable nivel de aceptación del sistema electrónico(AU)

Background and objectives: Little information is available on the use of computerized systems in preanesthetic assessment. Our aim was to evaluate staff acceptance of a computerized system for the structured recording of preoperative assessment data in our hospital. The time taken to complete the assessment was compared to the time usually taken to record the information on paper. Material and methods: Observational, descriptive cross-sectional survey of user satisfaction 3 months after the system had been launched. We later carried out a prospective observational study of 796 preanesthetic assessment visits, comparing the mean time the users took to record information on paper to the time required to enter the data into the computer, analyzing differences between anesthesiologists and according to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification and patient age. Results: A total of 401 paper records and 395 electronic files were included. The users believed that the computerized system improved quality and accessibility of recorded data and clinical decision-making. The time required to enter data into the computer was believed to be the main drawback; the users took a mean (SD) 15.21 (5.41) minutes to enter the electronic data and 13.37 (5.08) minutes to record the information on paper (P<.001). There were also significant differences in the time taken to record data according to ASA classification and between anesthesiologists (P<.001). Conclusions: In spite of drawbacks such as extra time taken to record electronic data, the users perceived benefits, such as improved quality and accessibility of records. For this reason, the computerized system was well accepted(AU)