OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a preprinted form on the documentation of clinical data and compliance with the national guidelines for the management of asthma. METHODS: Prospective audit six months before and after introduction of the form. RESULTS: Use of the form improved the documentation of past asthma history (69% v 93%, P < 0.001), current treatment (81% v 95%, P < 0.01), predicted peak flow (23% v 75%, P < 0.001), per cent predicted peak flow (1% v 62%, P < 0.001), and respiratory rate (81% v 95%, P = 0.007). Compliance with the British recommendations for treatment improved with use of the form (50% v 89%, P < 0.001) The prescription of steroids on discharge did not improve significantly (26% v 44%, P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The preprinted form resulted in enhanced documentation of data and conformity with current guidelines for the management of asthma.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a preprinted form on the documentation of clinical data and compliance with the national guidelines for the management of asthma. METHODS: Prospective audit six months before and after introduction of the form. RESULTS: Use of the form improved the documentation of past asthma history (69% v 93%, P < 0.001), current treatment (81% v 95%, P < 0.01), predicted peak flow (23% v 75%, P < 0.001), per cent predicted peak flow (1% v 62%, P < 0.001), and respiratory rate (81% v 95%, P = 0.007). Compliance with the British recommendations for treatment improved with use of the form (50% v 89%, P < 0.001) The prescription of steroids on discharge did not improve significantly (26% v 44%, P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The preprinted form resulted in enhanced documentation of data and conformity with current guidelines for the management of asthma.
Authors: Judith W Dexheimer; Elizabeth M Borycki; Kou-Wei Chiu; Kevin B Johnson; Dominik Aronsky Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 2.796