ArticleJournal of medical systems2020
Anesthesia Information Management Systems in the Czech Republic from the Perspective of Early Adopters.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2020. 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.
- Change Management and Digital Innovations in Hospitals of Five European Countries.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although theoretical studies on Anesthesia Information Management Systems (AIMS) have proved their benefits, much less attention has been paid to researching the actual adoption of AIMS. Only a few studies from the USA and Western Europe have been published up to now. The purpose of this article is to assess the adoption, motivation for, and barriers to, usage of AIMS from the perspective of early Czech adopters of these systems. A questionnaire was used to gather adopters' views on motivating factors, benefits encountered after introduction and obstacles perceived to adopting AIMS. Data about usage, costs and functionalities of each of the AIMS was obtained using semi-structured telephone interviews prior to sending out the questionnaire. Five AIMS from three different vendors in four academic hospitals (20% of Czech hospitals of this type) were identified. Improved clinical documentation and convenience for anesthesiologists was reported from every site. Lack of funds, however, was identified as the primary barrier to further adoption. The cost of introduction of AIMS per operating room varied between 1000 and 40,000 US dollars. Although the number of AIMS in the Czech Republic is limited, findings suggest that benefits have been experienced on every site. Findings corroborate previous studies from the USA and Western Europe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32072350What 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.