Comparison between automatic and handwritten anesthetic records: influence of total duration of anesthesia.
- Author:
Ling YE
1
;
Tao ZHU
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Anesthesiology;
organization & administration;
standards;
Forms and Records Control;
Hospital Information Systems;
organization & administration;
standards;
Humans;
Medical Records;
standards;
Medical Records Systems, Computerized;
Time Factors
- From:
Journal of Biomedical Engineering
2008;25(1):69-71
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
The records of 58 children's general anesthesia children (ASA I) were investigated. The handwritten records and the automatic anesthetic records were applied simultaneously to collect data from each patient. The total duration of anesthesia (T), the time for handwritten record (H), and the time for automatic record (A) were recorded by 3 timers respectively. Fifty-four records were available and were divided into two groups: group I, T > 1h (n = 29), group II: T < 1h (n = 25). Automatic record saved time (P < 0.001) in both groups. Furthermore, in group I, automatic record kept more vital sign notes (P < 0.001), but had no more event notes (P = 0.407); In group II, automatic record kept more event notes (P = 0.015), but had no more vital signs notes (P = 0.374). In general, automatic anesthetic record is suitable for all kinds of duration of anesthesia. When the time extends, it can provide a better platform for the anesthesiologist to improve the quality of management.
