| Literature DB >> 18957381 |
Anna M Lindquist1, Pauline E Johansson, Göran I Petersson, Britt-Inger Saveman, Gunilla C Nilsson.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health care personnel need access to updated information anywhere and at any time, and a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) has the potential to meet these requirements. A PDA is a mobile tool which has been employed widely for various purposes in health care practice, and the level of its use is expected to increase. Loaded with suitable functions and software applications, a PDA might qualify as the tool that personnel and students in health care need. In Sweden today, despite its leadership role in mobile technologies, PDAs are not commonly used, and there is a lack of suitable functions and software applications.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18957381 PMCID: PMC2629360 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Literature search—search terms and relevant reference titles
| Literature search | Search terms | Relevant reference titles |
| PubMed | Search was done with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and with the text words computers handheld, PDA, personal digital assistant, microcomputers, handheld computers, computers, handheld, mini computers, pocket PC and palm pilot, single and combined with nurse, nursing, medicine, physicians, healthcare, healthcare personnel, health personnel or students | 193 |
| CINAHL | Search was done with Subject Headings computers-hand-held, computers-portable, microcomputers and health-personnel, nurses, physicians, students, interns-and-residents | 163 |
| Cochrane | Search was done with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) minicomputers, microcomputers including computers-handheld and with the text words handheld-computer, PDA, microcomputer, minicomputer, mobile-device, health, care | 56 |
| (ELIN@Kalmar) | Search was done with the text words handheld-computer, mobile-device, minicomputer, microcomputer, PDA, health, care | 49 |
| IngentaConnect | Search was done with the text wFords handheld-computer, PD and, health-care | 5 |
| Reference lists | 5 | |
Criteria for quality assessment, based on the criteria for quality assessment from the Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU) [10]
| Design* | I=High | II=Medium | III=Low |
| RCT | Large and well accomplished multi-center study with sufficient descriptions of protocol, material, and methods. Enough sample size to answer the questions at issue. | neither high nor low | Sample size too small and/or too many interventions to give enough statistical power. Indistinctly described and high participant drop-out rate. |
| CCT | Well defined questions at issue, sufficient sample size and adequate statistics. | neither high nor low | Small sample size and questionable statistical methods. |
| DS | Large and well defined consecutive sample analyzed with adequate statistics, long follow-up. | neither high nor low | Small sample size, indistinctly described, follow-up too short, or inadequate statistics. |
| Q | Well defined questions at issue. Relevant and well described selection, data collection, and analysis. Logically and understandable interpretations and conclusions. Good communicability and conclusions. | neither high nor low | Insufficiently defined questions at issue, selection indistinctly described. Insufficiently described data collection, analysis, interpretations, and conclusions. Indistinct communicability and conclusions. |
*RCT = randomized controlled trial, CCT=quasi controlled trial, DS=descriptive study, Q=qualitative study.
Figure 1Model of System Acceptability (modified from Nielsen[12])
Articles included in present review (% = response rate)
| Authors | Aim | Participants | Methods | Results/conclusions | |
| Ammenwerth et al (2000) [ | Evaluate the prototype “a multi-functional mobile information and communication assistant”. | Physicians n=19, | One week simulation study, interviews and questionnaires | Participants found needs for mobile computer implementation in clinical routine. | |
| Aziz et al | Test if a PDA with built-in mobile telephone is more efficient in facilitating communication between health care providers than a hospital pager device. | Surgical physicians n=9 | Intervention crossover pilot study, questionnaire | Physicians equipped with a PDA rather than a pager, responded more quickly to a call and had a lower of failure to respond rate. | |
| Barrett et al | Evaluate PDA use and what advantages and disadvantages a PDA have. | Residents n=88 (40%) | Descriptive study, questionnaire and follow-up interviews | Most residents use PDA daily. The use included commercial medical references and personal organization software. | |
| Berglund et al (2007) [ | Describe nurses and nurse students demands of functions and usability in a PDA | Nurses n=12, nurse students n=84 | Descriptive study, questionnaire and interviews | With a PDA, the nurses and nurse students expect access to information about the patients, knowledge resources and functions for their daily work. | |
| Berner et al (2006) [ | Evaluate the effectiveness of a PDA-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) on no steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prescribing safety. | Residents n=68 | Randomized controlled trial | Participants provided with a PDA-based CDSS for NSAID prescribing made fewer unsafe treatment decisions than them without. | |
| Bird & Lane (2006) [ | Determine whether use of a PDA would improve emergency medicine documentation of procedures and patient resuscitations. | Emergency medicine residents (n=35) | PDA procedure were compared with paper-based | Sedation, thoracentesis, and ultrasound documentation significantly increased with PDA vs handwritings. | |
| Bosma et al | Assess point-of-care use of PDA in patient consultation management for Intravenous Resource Nurse team (IVRN) consultant service. | Nurses n=5 | Intervention study | Team members adopted the new technology with few problems and the service can now efficiently be analyzed. | |
| Brilla & Wartenberg (2004) [ | Examine the success of intervention of PDAs by comparing PDA use and user attitudes between residents of intervention group and residents in control group. | Neurology residents n=26 | Intervention study with control group, structured interviews | Applications most often used were the address book and drug databases. Their use was higher in the intervention group. | |
| Carroll & Christakis | Determine the percentage of paediatricians using PDAs and computers, as well as the perceived strengths and weaknesses of PDAs. | Paediatricians n=1185 (63%) | Randomized selected descriptive study, questionnaire | 35% currently used PDA in work. Most commonly used functions were drug reference, scheduling and medical calculations. | |
| Chan et al (2004) [ | Evaluate use of an electronic barcode system in PDA for patient identification during blood transfusion. | 41,000 blood samplings | Retrospective study | No incidents of blood transfusion to wrong patients, or wrong labelling of blood samples occurred. | |
| Chang et al | Develop PDA support systems for mass gatherings and evaluate ease of use and usefulness. | Nurses n=23, physicians n=6 | 5 simulated Patients’ profiles were tested and evaluated, questionnaire | The PDA system included many information items and was easy to use and useful for mass gatherings. | |
| Choi et al | Evaluate the PDA system MobileNurse. | Nurses n=6 | 1 day caring for simulated patients was evaluated, questionnaire | Most nurses agreed that MobileNurse was helpful and convenient. | |
| Criswell & Parchman | Evaluate the uses of handheld computers in family practice residency programs in the United States. | Directors n=306 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | Two thirds of the education programs used PDAs in their residencies. | |
| Dee et al | Examined how frequent attending physicians and physicians in training used PDAs for patient care. | Physicians, physicians in training n=108 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | 87% reported PDA use for patient encounters 55% reported frequent, use for patient care. | |
| De Groote & Doransk | Determine PDA use on an academic health sciences campus to define the level of training and support the library can provide. | Faculty n=216, medical residents n=124, others n=12 (24%) | Descriptive study, questionnaire | 61% of respondents used PDAs. Address book, date book, and calculator were the most commonly used. | |
| Doran et al (2007) [ | Develop an electronic information gathering and dissemination system to support both nursing-sensitive outcomes data collection and evidence-based decision-making at the point-of care. | Nurses n=51 | Cross-sectional study, work sampling, and focus group interviews | Most priorities were information concerning vital signs, drug information, and manuals of policies and procedures. | |
| Farrell & Rose (2008) [ | Investigate whether the use of PDAs enhanced nursing students’ pharmacological knowledge during clinical practice. | Nurse students n=76 (83%) | Quasi-experimental, questionnaire and focus group interviews | PDA users show a higher mean score compared to the control group. The PDA was easy to use and students perceived its use as beneficial to their clinical learning. | |
| Fischer et al | Evaluate the feasibility of incorporating handheld computing technology in a surgical residency program. | Residents n=69 | Intervention study, questionnaire | After a 5-month pilot period, 38% of surgical residents were using the procedure-logging program successfully. | |
| Galt et al | Compare drug information sources for PDAs, to minimize medication errors. | General practice physicians n=3 | Questionnaire | Lexi-Drugs were found to be the most specific and complete PDA resource. | |
| Gandsas et al | Compare the ability of surgical residents to identify anatomical structures displayed on a standard monitor versus a PDA screen. | Surgical residents n=23 | Randomized cross-over study, questionnaire | The differences between what’s displayed on a standard monitor vs a PDA screen were not significant. | |
| Garrett & Jackson (2006) [ | Design, implement, and evaluate a PDA-based e-portfolio tool to support reflective learning in practice. | Nursing students n=6, medical students n=4 | Intervention study, questionnaire and focus groups interview | There were positive attitudes to the use of PDA-based tool. | |
| Goldsworthy et al (2006) [ | Examine the relationships between the use of PDA and self-efficiency. | Nursing students n=36 | Randomized controlled trial | Findings showed a significant increase in self-efficacy in the groups with PDAs. | |
| Greenfield (2007) [ | Determine whether nursing medication errors could be reduced and nursing care provided more efficiently using PDA technology. | Nurse student n=87 | Non-randomized quasi-experimental study | Results for accuracy and speed were significantly higher in the PDA group than in the control group. | |
| Greiver et al (2005) [ | Explore whether diagnostic software in the PDA would improve care for suspect angina. | Family physicians n=18 | Randomized controlled pilot trial | A PDA-based software application can lead to improved care for patients with suspect angina. | |
| Honeybourne et al (2006) [ | Study impact of PDA on patient care to identify how often and which resources were used, as well as barriers to use in patient care. | Clinical and library staff phase I n=9, phase II n=12 | Intervention study, questionnaire | Participants used PDA in clinical setting to support evidence-based practice and education. | |
| Johnson et al (2004) [ | Describe user acceptance of a suite of programs that deliver information to clinicians’ PDAs. | Faculty, health care personnel n=16 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | Most users reported that they learned about new medical developments sooner than they otherwise would have. | |
| Johnstone et al (2004) [ | Evaluate the usefulness and acceptability of PDAs loaded with clinical decision software. | Medical students n=169 | Randomized controlled trial, questionnaire, and focus group interviews | The students found the PDA useful. They were less satisfied with the functional features. | |
| Kneebone et al (2003) [ | Describe the use of PDAs in scenario-based clinical procedural skills. | Nursing students, tutors and simulated patients n=25 | Evaluation of a PDA-based rating form, observations, and focus group interviews | The PDA forms were easy to use. There were potentially significant advantages over paper-based versions. | |
| Kushniruk et al (2005) [ | Explore the relationship between system usability and medical errors. | Physicians n=10 | Video and audio recorded PDA interactions | Certain types of usability problems were closely associated with the occurrence of specific types of errors in prescription of medications. | |
| Lapinsky et al (2001) [ | Evaluate benefits and drawbacks associated with introducing PDA technology in an intensive-care unit. | ICU team with physicians n=20, paramedical staff n=6 | Intervention study, scenario tests comparing PDA and paper textbook | PDAs were found to be convenient and functional, but more comprehensive training and improved searching capability were suggested. | |
| Lau et al | Understand the current patterns of PDA use among physicians working in palliative medicine. | Physicians n=72 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | The PDA was mostly used to organize a practice and look up medical references. Some used it in patient care. | |
| Leung et al | Test if a PDA could improve learning in evidence-based medicine. | Medical students n=169 | Randomized controlled trial | The PDA improved participants’ educational experience with evidence-based medicine benefiting the most. | |
| Lu et al (2003) [ | Identify the barriers that impede physicians’ PDA use. | Physicians n=20 | Descriptive study, interview | Four barriers were identified: organization, usability, inadequate technology support or access, and lack of need or motivation. | |
| McAlearney et al (2004) [ | Examine physician’s perspectives about their experiences with PDAs in clinical practice. | Physicians n=54 | Qualitative study, focus groups interview | Users seemed generally satisfied, the device helped them increase productivity and improve patient care. | |
| McLeod et al (2003) [ | Investigate PDA use in medical settings, use prevalence, user demo-graphic, and hardware preferences. | Physicians, medical students n=473 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | Medical students reported more frequent PDA use in hospital settings and for direct patient care than physicians. | |
| Mihailidis et al (2006) [ | Determine what assistive computing device features and functions nurses need. | Nurses n=20 | Descriptive pilot study, questionnaire | Data analysis revealed a strong desire to facilitate information access and administer safe medication. | |
| Morris et al (2007) [ | Understand resident and faculty PDA use and training. | Physicians and n=410 (69%) | Multi-center, questionnaire | Use of PDAs was common. Common barriers were lack of time, knowledge, and formal education. | |
| Murphy et al (2006) [ | Determine the frequency of use, usefulness, accessibility, and credibility of PDA, computer, and print drug information resources. | Nurses n=14, physicians n=13 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | The use of PDAs and computers remains limited. Education for users may facilitate future computer and PDA use. | |
| Pattillo et al (2007) [ | Identify nursing students’ use of PDAs and compare and contrast the frequency of user resources with comparable text resources. | Nursing students n=90 | Intervention study, with control group, questionnaire | The nursing students used their PDAs to look up words and unfamiliar terms, drugs, and the meaning of laboratory values. | |
| Price (2005) [ | Examine whether using Palm Prevention improved adherence to 5 preventive measures in primary care. | General practitioners n=8 | Randomized controlled trial (pilot study) | The guidelines in PDA increased screening. | |
| Ranson et al (2007) [ | Understand how physicians use PDAs in their clinical practice and describe how they use a PDA learning portfolio. | Physicians n=10 | Literature review and a case study | Information for clinical decisions, patient education and teaching was used and the use was associated with the value of information. | |
| Rothschild et al (2002) [ | Evaluate the clinical contribution of a drug database, usage patterns, decision making etc. | Physicians n=703, medical students n=243 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | Physicians reported time saving during information retrieval and improves decision making. | |
| Rudkin et al | Assess feasibility of PDA. | Residents n=18, medicine attending n=12 | Prospective cross-over time-motion study. | PDAs are feasible in emergency department and change management more often than texts. | |
| Ruland (2002) [ | Evaluate nurses’ use of CHOICE, a handheld, computer-based support system for preference-based care planning. | Nurses n=28, patients n=155 | Intervention study, two control groups | Nurses’ use of CHOICE made nursing care more consistent with patient preferences and improved patients’ preference achievement. | |
| Shiffman et al (1999) [ | Evaluate physician’s satisfaction and frustrations with the use of a PDA based program in asthma care. | Physicians in paediatrics n=9 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | Three users gave strongly positive ratings while six users were neutral. Majority used documentation functions. | |
| Stroud et al | Describe the prevalence and patterns of PDA use among nurse practitioners, students, and faculty. | Nurse practitioner students, faculty n=227 | Descriptive study, questionnaire | 67% of the participants used PDAs. Use was higher among men. Most participants related that PDA use supported clinical decision making. | |
| Teolis et al (2004) [ | Determine what health professionals perceived as barriers to PDA use and how frequently participants used their PDAs for online searching. | Health care personnel n=97, others n=12 | Descriptive study, questionnaire and interview | PDAs electronic information and software at point of care, users give users access to a wide variety of also experienced multiple barriers. | |
| Yu et al (2007) [ | Assess the breadth of and determine the patterns of clinical decision support (CDS) program and compare the difference in the recorded and reported PDA CDS utilization among physicians. | Physicians in training n=68 (82%) | A part of a larger study. An automatic tracking program in PDA, questionnaire | Physicians preferred to use certain PDA CDS tools in clinical settings. Drug references and medical calculator were commonly used. |
Reported usefulness as usability and utility for different functions and features of the PDA
| -------------------------- Utility -------------------------- | -------------------------- Usability -------------------------- | |||
| Functions | Requested | Used | Evaluated | Comments |
| Address, phone book | [ | [ | [ | Valuable and commonly used |
| Calendar, scheduling | [ | [ | [ | Commonly used |
| Memo pads, To Do list | [ | [ | [ | Valuable |
| Internet access, email | [ | [ | [ | Not often used |
| Phone | [ | [ | [ | Improve access |
| Word processing | [ | [ | [ | Not often used |
| Alarm | [ | [ | - | - |
| Camera | [ | [ | [ | Useful |
| Video | [ | [ | [ | Developable |
| *References refer to publications where the respective function was requested, used or evaluated | ||||
Reported usefulness as usability and utility for software applications on the PDA
| -------------------------- Utility -------------------------- | -------------------------- Usability -------------------------- | |||
| Software application | Requested | Used | Evaluated | Comments |
| Drug information | [ | [ | [ | Commonly used |
| Medical information | [ | [ | [ | Commonly used |
| Guidelines | [ | [ | [ | Improve care |
| Medical list/ orders | [ | [ | [ | Helpful, reduce error |
| Medical calculator | [ | [ | [ | Commonly used |
| Dictionaries | [ | - | - | - |
| Patient information | [ | [ | [ | Useful, convenient |
| Barcode identification | [ | [ | [ | Reduce human errors |
| Test results | [ | [ | [ | Convenient |
| Prescription | - | [ | [ | Increased safety |
| Billing | - | [ | [ | Not often used |
| Education | - | [ | [ | Preferable |
| Patient education | [ | [ | [ | - |
| Anatomy atlas | - | [ | - | |
| Statistical analysis | - | [ | [ | Valuable |
| *References refer to publications where the respective software application was requested, used or evaluated | ||||