ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2023
Factors affecting completeness of anaesthetic record: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anaesthesia Information Management Systems (AIMS) are of critical importance for ensuring the comprehensive recording of anaesthesia data. This study aimed to investigate the factors influencing the completeness of anaesthetic records created by various healthcare professionals including anesthesiologists, nurse anaesthetists, residents/fellows, and anaesthetic nurse trainees. Methods: Employing an online Google Forms questionnaire, this descriptive research focused on understanding the factors contributing to the completeness of anaesthetic records. The survey was distributed to all anaesthesia personnel in the department, comprising a total of 165 participants. The questionnaire encompassed three primary aspects:(1) personal information, (2) knowledge related to recording anaesthetic records, and (3) concerns related to achieving high-quality record-keeping. To assess completeness, anaesthetic record forms were evaluated based on the 2020 Medical Record Audit Guideline of Thailand's National Health Security Office, with a completeness rate exceeding 80% deemed acceptable. Spearman's rank correlation was employed to analyze the connections between the associated factors and completeness of anaesthetic records. Results: From August to October 2021, 165 records were examined, indicating a completeness rate of 89.7%. Several factors exhibited significant correlations with the completeness of anaesthetic records. These included age (r = -0.223; Conclusion: While personal attributes emerged as pivotal factors influencing record completeness, continuous training and a collaborative attitude were identified as critical for maintaining sustainability and achieving record-keeping goals.
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.