ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
Effect of introduction of a new electronic anesthesia record (Epic) system on the safety and efficiency of patient care in a gastrointestinal endoscopy suite-comparison with historical cohort.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementing a New Electronic Health Record System in a University Hospital: The Effect on Reported Medication Errors.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUse of electronic medical record systems has increased in the recent years. Epic is one such system gaining popularity in the USA. Epic is a private company, which invented the electronic documentation system adopted in our hospital. In spite of many presumed advantages, its use is not critically analyzed. Some of the perceived advantages are increased efficiency and protection against litigation as a result of accurate documentation. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, retrospective data of 305 patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (wherein electronic charting was used - "Epic group") were compared with 288 patients who underwent the same procedure with documentation saved on a paper chart ("paper group"). Time of various events involved in the procedure such as anesthesia start, endoscope insertion, endoscope removal, and transfer to the postanesthesia care unit were routinely documented. From this data, the various time durations were calculated.
resultsBoth "anesthesia start to scope insertion" times and "scope removal to transfer" times were significantly less in the Epic group compared to the paper group. Use of Epic system led to a saving of 4 min of procedure time per patient. However, the mean oxygen saturation was significantly less in the Epic group.
conclusionIn spite of perceived advantages of Epic documentation system, significant hurdles remain with its use. Although the system allows seamless flow of patients, failure to remove all artifacts can lead to errors and become a source of potential litigation hazard.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.