Anesthesia Information System vs Paper Anesthesia Records for Care Congruency

NCT ID: NCT02258100

Last Updated: 2019-09-11

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: COMPLETED
• Total Enrollment: 189 participants
• Study Classification: OBSERVATIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2014-09-30
• Study Completion Date: 2015-04-30

Brief Summary

To date the effect of AIMS on medical interventions has not been studied. We seek to retrospectively evaluate paper and electronic anesthesia records among a single surgical population (esophageal surgery) to ascertain any differences that may exist between cohorts with regards to chart completion, anesthetic management and medical care.

Detailed Description

Anesthesia information systems (AIMS) are increasingly used to electronically capture physiologic and management data during anesthesia. Proponents tout an improved accuracy of data yet this has not been formally evaluated. Furthermore, whether AIMS is associated with changes in medical care is unknown. Studies with newer technologies have demonstrated increased medical interventions as a result of implementation. The pulmonary artery catheter was shown to increase medical interventions when used yet no improvement in outcomes are observed and some suggest a deleterious effect. 1 Several studies suggest improved patient care with electronic anesthesia records. 2,3 These all center around clinical decision support that reminds clinicians to give certain medications or ensure chart completion. Despite these advantages there are no studies evaluating the 'hawthorne effect' of AIMS. Physiologic data is now recorded at each data point using AIMS. This differs significantly from paper anesthesia records in which clinicians often chart physiologic trends choosing to omit spurious values. It is possible that a Hawthorne effect may occur in this scenario with increased data collection and an increased ability to scrutinize the medical record. Given the litigious nature of medical practice today, there is concern about the impact of AIMS on medicolegal liability. 4 Yet, to date the effect of AIMS on medical interventions has not been studied. We seek to retrospectively evaluate paper and electronic anesthesia records among a single surgical population (esophageal surgery) to ascertain any differences that may exist between cohorts with regards to chart completion, anesthetic management and medical care.

Conditions

Paper Versus EMR Generated Anesthesia Records

Study Design

• Observational Model Type: COHORT
• Study Time Perspective: RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Paper

Patients receiving care documented via paper anesthesia record.

No interventions assigned to this group

AIMS

Patients receiving care documented via electronic anesthesia record.

Electronic Medical Record

Intervention Type: OTHER

Advent of EMR use for documentation of anesthetic care

Interventions

Electronic Medical Record

Advent of EMR use for documentation of anesthetic care

Intervention Type: OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Underwent esophageal surgery and had anesthetic documented in medical record

Exclusion Criteria

• Cases less than one hour

• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Sponsors

Endeavor Health

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Torin D Shear, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Endeavor Health

Locations

Evanston Hospital

Evanston, Illinois, United States

Countries

United States

Other Identifiers

EH14-325

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id