Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31399096›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

The way from pen and paper to electronic documentation in a German emergency department.

Benjamin Lucas, Peter Schladitz, Wiebke Schirrmeister, Gerald Pliske, Felix Walcher, Martin Kulla, Dominik Brammen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Benjamin LucasDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, D 39120, Magdeburg, Germany. benjamin.lucas@med.ovgu.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1666-5093
Peter SchladitzDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, D 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Wiebke SchirrmeisterDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, D 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Gerald PliskeDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, D 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Felix WalcherDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, D 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Martin KullaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, Bundeswehrhospital Ulm, Oberer Eselsberg 40, 89081, Ulm, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7454-0876
Dominik BrammenDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, D-39120, Magdeburg, Germany.

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01KX1319AGemeinsame Bundesausschuss VSF1_2017-020German Federal Ministry of Defence - Research Grant SoFo 34K3-17 1515 DigiPenGerman Federal Ministry of Defence - Research Grant SoFo 37K3-S-20 1616 HappyER
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome of the advantages of implementing electronic emergency department information systems (EDIS) are improvements in data availability and simplification of statistical evaluations of emergency department (ED) treatments. However, for multi-center evaluations, standardized documentation is necessary. The AKTIN project ("National Emergency Department Register: Improvement of Health Services Research in Acute Medicine in Germany") has used the "German Emergency Department Medical Record" (GEDMR) published by the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive and Emergency Care as the documentation standard for its national data registry.

methodsUntil March 2016 the documentation standard in ED was the pen-and-paper version of the GEDMR. In April 2016 we implemented the GEDMR in a timeline-based EDIS. Related to this, we compared the availability of structured treatment information of traumatological patients between pen-and-paper-based and electronic documentation, with special focus on the treatment time.

resultsAll 796 data fields of the 6 modules (basic data, severe trauma, patient surveillance, anesthesia, council, neurology) were adapted for use with the existing EDIS configuration by a physician working regularly in the ED. Electronic implementation increased availability of structured anamnesis and treatment information. However, treatment time was increased in electronic documentation both immediately (2:12 ± 0:04 h; n = 2907) and 6 months after implementation (2:18 ± 0:03 h; n = 4778) compared to the pen-and-paper group (1:43 ± 0:02 h; n = 2523; p < 0.001).

conclusionsWe successfully implemented standardized documentation in an EDIS. The availability of structured treatment information was improved, but treatment time was also increased. Thus, further work is necessary to improve input time.

Indexed as

DocumentationElectronic Health RecordsEmergency Service, HospitalGermanyHumansMaleRegistriesRetrospective StudiesElectronic health recordsEmergency departmentRegistry

Identifiers

PMID31399096
PMCPMC6688333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.