BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: An increasing number of studies suggest that anaesthesia information management systems (AIMS) improve clinical care. The purpose of this web survey study was to assess the prevalence of AIMS in European university-affiliated anaesthesia departments and to identify the motivations for and barriers to AIMS adoption. METHODS: A survey was e-mailed to 252 academic anaesthesia chairs of 294 university-affiliated hospitals in 22 European countries, with 41 e-mails returned as undeliverable, leaving the final sample equal to 211. Responders provided information on demographics, the other information technology systems available in their hospitals, and current implementation status of AIMS. Adopters were asked about motivations for installing AIMS, whereas nonadopters were asked about barriers to AIMS adoption. RESULTS: Eighty-six (29%) of 294 hospitals responded. Forty-four of the 86 departments (51%) were considered AIMS adopters because they were already using (n = 15), implementing (n = 13) or selecting an AIMS (n = 16). The 42 remaining departments (49%) were considered nonadopters as they were not expecting to install an AIMS owing to lack of funds (n = 27), other reasons (n = 13) such as lack of support from the information technology department, or simply did not have a plan (n = 2). The top ranked motivators for adopting AIMS were improved clinical documentation, improvement in patient care and safety, and convenience for anaesthesiologists. AIMS adopters were more likely than nonadopters to already have other information technology systems deployed throughout the hospital. CONCLUSION: At least 44 (or 15%) of the 294 university-affiliated departments surveyed in this study have already implemented, are implementing, or are currently selecting an AIMS. The main barrier identified by AIMS nonadopters is lack of funds.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: An increasing number of studies suggest that anaesthesia information management systems (AIMS) improve clinical care. The purpose of this web survey study was to assess the prevalence of AIMS in European university-affiliated anaesthesia departments and to identify the motivations for and barriers to AIMS adoption. METHODS: A survey was e-mailed to 252 academic anaesthesia chairs of 294 university-affiliated hospitals in 22 European countries, with 41 e-mails returned as undeliverable, leaving the final sample equal to 211. Responders provided information on demographics, the other information technology systems available in their hospitals, and current implementation status of AIMS. Adopters were asked about motivations for installing AIMS, whereas nonadopters were asked about barriers to AIMS adoption. RESULTS: Eighty-six (29%) of 294 hospitals responded. Forty-four of the 86 departments (51%) were considered AIMS adopters because they were already using (n = 15), implementing (n = 13) or selecting an AIMS (n = 16). The 42 remaining departments (49%) were considered nonadopters as they were not expecting to install an AIMS owing to lack of funds (n = 27), other reasons (n = 13) such as lack of support from the information technology department, or simply did not have a plan (n = 2). The top ranked motivators for adopting AIMS were improved clinical documentation, improvement in patient care and safety, and convenience for anaesthesiologists. AIMS adopters were more likely than nonadopters to already have other information technology systems deployed throughout the hospital. CONCLUSION: At least 44 (or 15%) of the 294 university-affiliated departments surveyed in this study have already implemented, are implementing, or are currently selecting an AIMS. The main barrier identified by AIMS nonadopters is lack of funds.
Authors: Terrence L Trentman; Jeff T Mueller; Keith J Ruskin; Brie N Noble; Christine A Doyle Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2011-07-05 Impact factor: 2.502