ArticleBMC health services research2019
The way from pen and paper to electronic documentation in a German emergency department.
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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Analyzation of Change in Documentation due to the Introduction of Electronic Patient Records in Hospitals-A Systematic Review.Journal of medical systems · 2022Pooled it
- The Effects of Health Information Technology on Quality of Care in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Health Care Professionals' Perspectives on Using eHealth Tools in Advanced Home Care: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Observational
- Adopting an American framework to optimize nursing admission documentation in an Australian health organization.JAMIA open · 2022Article
- Article
- Validation of chief complaints, medical history, medications, and physician diagnoses structured with an integrated emergency department information system in Japan: the Next Stage ER system.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
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
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.