INTRODUCTION:Tight glycemic control (TGC) has shown benefits but has been difficult to achieve consistently. Model-based methods and computerized protocols offer the opportunity to improve TGC quality but require human data entry, particularly of blood glucose (BG) values, which can be significantly prone to error. This study presents the design and optimization of data entry methods to minimize error for a computerized and model-based TGC method prior to pilot clinical trials. METHOD: To minimize data entry error, two tests were carried out to optimize a method with errors less than the 5%-plus reported in other studies. Four initial methods were tested on 40 subjects in random order, and the best two were tested more rigorously on 34 subjects. The tests measured entry speed and accuracy. Errors were reported as corrected and uncorrected errors, with the sum comprising a total error rate. The first set of tests used randomly selected values, while the second set used the same values for all subjects to allow comparisons across users and direct assessment of the magnitude of errors. These research tests were approved by the University of Canterbury Ethics Committee. RESULTS: The final data entry method tested reduced errors to less than 1-2%, a 60-80% reduction from reported values. The magnitude of errors was clinically significant and was typically by 10.0 mmol/liter or an order of magnitude but only for extreme values of BG < 2.0 mmol/liter or BG > 15.0-20.0 mmol/liter, both of which could be easily corrected with automated checking of extreme values for safety. CONCLUSIONS: The data entry method selected significantly reduced data entry errors in the limited design tests presented, and is in use on a clinical pilot TGC study. The overall approach and testing methods are easily performed and generalizable to other applications and protocols.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Tight glycemic control (TGC) has shown benefits but has been difficult to achieve consistently. Model-based methods and computerized protocols offer the opportunity to improve TGC quality but require human data entry, particularly of blood glucose (BG) values, which can be significantly prone to error. This study presents the design and optimization of data entry methods to minimize error for a computerized and model-based TGC method prior to pilot clinical trials. METHOD: To minimize data entry error, two tests were carried out to optimize a method with errors less than the 5%-plus reported in other studies. Four initial methods were tested on 40 subjects in random order, and the best two were tested more rigorously on 34 subjects. The tests measured entry speed and accuracy. Errors were reported as corrected and uncorrected errors, with the sum comprising a total error rate. The first set of tests used randomly selected values, while the second set used the same values for all subjects to allow comparisons across users and direct assessment of the magnitude of errors. These research tests were approved by the University of Canterbury Ethics Committee. RESULTS: The final data entry method tested reduced errors to less than 1-2%, a 60-80% reduction from reported values. The magnitude of errors was clinically significant and was typically by 10.0 mmol/liter or an order of magnitude but only for extreme values of BG < 2.0 mmol/liter or BG > 15.0-20.0 mmol/liter, both of which could be easily corrected with automated checking of extreme values for safety. CONCLUSIONS: The data entry method selected significantly reduced data entry errors in the limited design tests presented, and is in use on a clinical pilot TGC study. The overall approach and testing methods are easily performed and generalizable to other applications and protocols.
Authors: J Geoffrey Chase; Christopher G Pretty; Leesa Pfeifer; Geoffrey M Shaw; Jean-Charles Preiser; Aaron J Le Compte; Jessica Lin; Darren Hewett; Katherine T Moorhead; Thomas Desaive Journal: Crit Care Date: 2010-08-12 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Alan H Morris; James Orme; Jonathon D Truwit; Jay Steingrub; Colin Grissom; Kang H Lee; Guoliang L Li; B Taylor Thompson; Roy Brower; Mark Tidswell; Gordon R Bernard; Dean Sorenson; Katherine Sward; Hui Zheng; David Schoenfeld; Homer Warner Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: J Geoffrey Chase; Aaron J Le Compte; J-C Preiser; Geoffrey M Shaw; Sophie Penning; Thomas Desaive Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 6.925
Authors: Alicia Evans; Aaron Le Compte; Chia-Siong Tan; Logan Ward; James Steel; Christopher G Pretty; Sophie Penning; Fatanah Suhaimi; Geoffrey M Shaw; Thomas Desaive; J Geoffrey Chase Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2012-01-01
Authors: Athirah Abdul Razak; Asma Abu-Samah; Normy Norfiza Abdul Razak; Ummu Jamaludin; Fatanah Suhaimi; Azrina Ralib; Mohd Basri Mat Nor; Christopher Pretty; Jennifer Laura Knopp; James Geoffrey Chase Journal: Med Devices (Auckl) Date: 2020-06-04
Authors: Brenda W Gillespie; Louis-Philippe Laurin; Dawn Zinsser; Richard Lafayette; Maddalena Marasa; Scott E Wenderfer; Suzanne Vento; Caroline Poulton; Laura Barisoni; Jarcy Zee; Margaret Helmuth; Francesca Lugani; Margret Kamel; Peg Hill-Callahan; Stephen M Hewitt; Laura H Mariani; William E Smoyer; Larry A Greenbaum; Debbie S Gipson; Bruce M Robinson; Ali G Gharavi; Lisa M Guay-Woodford; Howard Trachtman Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Commun Date: 2021-02-17