Jack M Peace1, Trevor C Yuen2, Meredith H Borak2, Dana P Edelson3. 1. Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 2. Section of Hospital Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 3. Section of Hospital Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. Electronic address: dperes@uchicago.edu.
Abstract
AIM: Conventional paper-based resuscitation transcripts are notoriously inaccurate, often lacking the precision that is necessary for recording a fast-paced resuscitation. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a tablet computer-based application could improve upon conventional practices for resuscitation documentation. METHODS: Nurses used either the conventional paper code sheet or a tablet application during simulated resuscitation events. Recorded events were compared to a gold standard record generated from video recordings of the simulations and a CPR-sensing defibrillator/monitor. Events compared included defibrillations, medication deliveries, and other interventions. RESULTS: During the study period, 199 unique interventions were observed in the gold standard record. Of these, 102 occurred during simulations recorded by the tablet application, 78 by the paper code sheet, and 19 during scenarios captured simultaneously by both documentation methods These occurred over 18 simulated resuscitation scenarios, in which 9 nurses participated. The tablet application had a mean sensitivity of 88.0% for all interventions, compared to 67.9% for the paper code sheet (P=0.001). The median time discrepancy was 3s for the tablet, and 77s for the paper code sheet when compared to the gold standard (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to prior studies, we found that conventional paper-based documentation practices are inaccurate, often misreporting intervention delivery times or missing their delivery entirely. However, our study also demonstrated that a tablet-based documentation method may represent a means to substantially improve resuscitation documentation quality, which could have implications for resuscitation quality improvement and research.
AIM: Conventional paper-based resuscitation transcripts are notoriously inaccurate, often lacking the precision that is necessary for recording a fast-paced resuscitation. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a tablet computer-based application could improve upon conventional practices for resuscitation documentation. METHODS: Nurses used either the conventional paper code sheet or a tablet application during simulated resuscitation events. Recorded events were compared to a gold standard record generated from video recordings of the simulations and a CPR-sensing defibrillator/monitor. Events compared included defibrillations, medication deliveries, and other interventions. RESULTS: During the study period, 199 unique interventions were observed in the gold standard record. Of these, 102 occurred during simulations recorded by the tablet application, 78 by the paper code sheet, and 19 during scenarios captured simultaneously by both documentation methods These occurred over 18 simulated resuscitation scenarios, in which 9 nurses participated. The tablet application had a mean sensitivity of 88.0% for all interventions, compared to 67.9% for the paper code sheet (P=0.001). The median time discrepancy was 3s for the tablet, and 77s for the paper code sheet when compared to the gold standard (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to prior studies, we found that conventional paper-based documentation practices are inaccurate, often misreporting intervention delivery times or missing their delivery entirely. However, our study also demonstrated that a tablet-based documentation method may represent a means to substantially improve resuscitation documentation quality, which could have implications for resuscitation quality improvement and research.
Authors: Benjamin S Abella; Jason P Alvarado; Helge Myklebust; Dana P Edelson; Anne Barry; Nicholas O'Hearn; Terry L Vanden Hoek; Lance B Becker Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-01-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Elizabeth A Ferguson; Carey Roth Bayer; Susan Fronzeo; Cheryl Tuckerman; Larissa Hutchins; Kathryn Roberts; Judy Verger; Vinay Nadkarni; Richard Lin Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Eliot Grigg; Andrew Palmer; Jeffrey Grigg; Peter Oppenheimer; Tim Wu; Axel Roesler; Bala Nair; Brian Ross Journal: Emerg Med J Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Lars W Andersen; Asger Granfeldt; Clifton W Callaway; Steven M Bradley; Jasmeet Soar; Jerry P Nolan; Tobias Kurth; Michael W Donnino Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lars W Andersen; Tobias Kurth; Maureen Chase; Katherine M Berg; Michael N Cocchi; Clifton Callaway; Michael W Donnino Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-04-06
Authors: T Grundgeiger; M Albert; D Reinhardt; O Happel; A Steinisch; T Wurmb Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2016-04-16 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Johan N Siebert; Frederic Ehrler; Christophe Combescure; Laurence Lacroix; Kevin Haddad; Oliver Sanchez; Alain Gervaix; Christian Lovis; Sergio Manzano Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Frederikke Bøgh Jensen; Kathrine Tornbjerg Ladefoged; Tim Alex Lindskou; Morten Breinholt Søvsø; Erika Frischknecht Christensen; Maurizio Teli Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-27 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Lone Due Vestergaard; Kasper Glerup Lauridsen; Niels Henrik Vinther Krarup; Jane Uhrenholt Kristensen; Lone Kaerslund Andersen; Bo Løfgren Journal: Open Access Emerg Med Date: 2021-12-16
Authors: Elizabeth A Hunt; Jordan M Duval-Arnould; Melania M Bembea; Tia Raymond; Aaron Calhoun; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni; Michael Donnino; Lars W Andersen Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-09-07
Authors: Michael S Dittmar; Sabrina Zimmermann; Marcus Creutzenberg; Sylvia Bele; Diane Bitzinger; Dirk Lunz; Bernhard M Graf; Martin Kieninger Journal: BMC Emerg Med Date: 2021-06-10