PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16106337

A comparison study: paper-based versus web-based data collection and management.

Abstract

The purpose of this pilot study was to compare the cost, accuracy, and efficiency of a web-enhanced handheld computer data collection system with those of the traditional paper-based data collection and management system and to increase awareness/knowledge of researchers on these two data collection and management methods. This is an important topic because funding resources are diminishing and high startup costs associated with automated data collection systems may give researchers pause when faced with these financial expenditures. Hence, this information will position grant writers and funders to make intelligent decisions regarding the feasibility and advantage of web-enhanced electronic data collection strategies.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Bryan A Weber, Hossein Yarandi, Meredeth A Rowe, Justus P Weber. 2005. A comparison study: paper-based versus web-based data collection and management.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2004.11.003

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Technologies for image distribution in hospitals.

After the establishment of web-based image distribution, three challenges for image distribution can be identified today. Firstly, PACS (picture archiving and communication system) and the distribution of radiological images and reports need to be integrated with the emerging electronic medical record. Secondly, report and image data should be available on mobile devices like PDAs (personal digital assistants) or smartphones in the future. Thirdly, future systems must be available not only to transmit sectional images, but also to allow access to three- and four-dimensional data that are produced by multidetector CT and modern MR scanners.

Computers, Handheld↗

House officer procedure documentation using a Personal Digital Assistant: a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) have been integrated into daily practice for many emergency physicians and house officers. Few objective data exist that quantify the effect of PDAs on documentation. The objective of this study was to determine whether use of a PDA would improve emergency medicine house officer documentation of procedures and patient resuscitations. METHODS: Twelve first-year Emergency Medicine (EM) residents were provided a Palm V (Palm, Inc., Santa Clara, California, USA) PDA. A customizable patient procedure and encounter program was constructed and loaded into each PDA. Residents were instructed to enter information on patients who had any of 20 procedures performed, were deemed clinically unstable, or on whom follow-up was obtained. These data were downloaded to the residency coordinator's desktop computer on a weekly basis for 36 months. The mean number of procedures and encounters performed per resident over a three year period were then compared with those of 12 historical controls from a previous residency class that had recorded the same information using a handwritten card system for 36 months. Means of both groups were compared a two-tailed Student's t test with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. One hundred randomly selected entries from both the PDA and handwritten groups were reviewed for completeness. Another group of 11 residents who had used both handwritten and PDA procedure logs for one year each were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding their satisfaction with the PDA system. RESULTS: Mean documentation of three procedures significantly increased in the PDA vs handwritten groups: conscious sedation 24.0 vs 0.03 (p = 0.001); thoracentesis 3.0 vs 0.0 (p = 0.001); and ED ultrasound 24.5 vs. 0.0 (p = 0.001). In the handwritten cohort, only the number of cardioversions/defibrillations (26.5 vs 11.5) was statistically increased (p = 0.001). Of the PDA entries, 100% were entered completely, compared to only 91% of the handwritten group, including 4% that were illegible. 10 of 11 questioned residents preferred the PDA procedure log to a handwritten log (mean +/- SD Likert-scale score of 1.6 +/- 0.9). CONCLUSION: Overall use of a PDA did not significantly change EM resident procedure or patient resuscitation documentation when used over a three-year period. Statistically significant differences between the handwritten and PDA groups likely represent alterations in the standard of ED care over time. Residents overwhelmingly preferred the PDA procedure log to a handwritten log and more entries are complete using the PDA. These favorable comparisons and the numerous other uses of PDAs may make them an attractive alternative for resident documentation.

Computers, Handheld↗