Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2008 Jan 18:8:3.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-3.

Prospective, randomized evaluation of a personal digital assistant-based research tool in the emergency department

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Prospective, randomized evaluation of a personal digital assistant-based research tool in the emergency department

Morris L Rivera et al. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. .

Abstract

Background: Personal digital assistants (PDA) offer putative advantages over paper for collecting research data. However, there are no data prospectively comparing PDA and paper in the emergency department. The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the performance of PDA and paper enrollment instruments with respect to time required and errors generated.

Methods: We randomized consecutive patients enrolled in an ongoing prospective study to having their data recorded either on a PDA or a paper data collection instrument. For each method, we recorded the total time required for enrollment, and the time required for manual transcription (paper) onto a computer database. We compared data error rates by examining missing data, nonsensical data, and errors made during the transcription of paper forms. Statistical comparisons were performed by Kruskal-Wallis and Poisson regression analyses for time and errors, respectively.

Results: We enrolled 68 patients (37 PDA, 31 paper). Two of 31 paper forms were not available for analysis. Total data gathering times, inclusive of transcription, were significantly less for PDA (6:13 min per patient) compared to paper (9:12 min per patient; p < 0.001). There were a total of 0.9 missing and nonsense errors per paper form compared to 0.2 errors per PDA form (p < 0.001). An additional 0.7 errors per paper form were generated during transcription. In total, there were 1.6 errors per paper form and 0.2 errors per PDA form (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Using a PDA-based data collection instrument for clinical research reduces the time required for data gathering and significantly improves data integrity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PDA screens. Ten screen images comprise the PDA form.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Study design. Consecutive patients were randomized to either enrollment instrument. Two paper forms were lost prior to study conclusion.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Error rates. Error rates were significantly higher for paper versus PDA.

References

    1. Wilcox RA, La Tella RR. The personal digital assistant: a new medical instrument for the exchange of clinical information at the point of care. Med J Aust. 2001;175:659–662. - PubMed
    1. Carroll AE, Saluja S, Tarczy-Hornoch P. The implementation of a personal digital assistant (PDA) based record and charting system: lessons learned. Proc AMIA Symp. 2002:111–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Keplar KE, Urbanski CJ. Personal digital assistant applications for the healthcare provider. Ann Pharmacother. 2003;37:287–96. doi: 10.1345/aph.1C394. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wiggins RH. Personal digital assistants. J Digit Imaging. 2004;17:5–17. doi: 10.1007/s10278-003-1665-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. VanDenKerkhof EG, Goldstein DH, Lane J, Rimmer MJ, Van Dijk JP. Using a personal digital assistant enhances gathering of patient data on an acute pain management service: a pilot study. Can J Anesth. 2003;50:368–75. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources