Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:54:00.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DEVELOPING AN IPAD® APPLICATION FOR DATA COLLECTION IN A RHEUMATOLOGY RESEARCH CLINIC

Part of: Special Collection - Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2015

Hussam Kaka ,
Renise Ayearst ,
Maithy Tran ,
Zahi Touma ,
Maria Bagovich ,
Ophir Vinik ,
Mansour Somaily ,
Amir Haddad ,
Dafna D. Gladman  and
Vinod Chandran
Hussam Kaka
Affiliation:
University of Toronto, Institute of Medical Science Summer Student, Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Renise Ayearst
Affiliation:
IPART (International Psoriasis and Arthritis Research Team) Program, Toronto Western Hospital
Maithy Tran
Affiliation:
Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Zahi Touma
Affiliation:
Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Maria Bagovich
Affiliation:
University of Toronto Rheumatology Training Program, Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Ophir Vinik
Affiliation:
University of Toronto Rheumatology Training Program, Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Mansour Somaily
Affiliation:
Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Amir Haddad
Affiliation:
Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Psoriatic Arthritis Program, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network
Dafna D. Gladman
Affiliation:
University of Toronto, Toronto Western Research Institute, Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital
Vinod Chandran
Affiliation:
University of Toronto, Psoriatic Arthritis Program, University Health Network, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospitalvinod.chandran@uhnres.utoronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: Clinical research data are often collected on paper and later inputted onto an electronic database. This method is time consuming and potentially introduces errors. Therefore, to make primary data collection more efficient and less error prone we aimed to develop a touch-screen application for data collection in a psoriatic arthritis research clinic and compared it with the pre-existing paper-based system.

Methods: We developed a Web application using Java and optimized it for the iPad®. It highlights missing fields for physicians in real time, and only permits submission of data collection form after corrections are made. For its evaluation, seven physicians participated, and before each patient visit they were randomly assigned paper or iPad® data entry. Number of errors, length of visit, and time between clinic visit and completion of data entry were measured.

Results: A total of 106 patients seen in the clinic who agreed to participate were randomly assigned to be evaluated by clinic physicians using the iPad® (fifty-three patients) or a paper protocol (fifty-three patients). On average, 3.34 omissions were found per paper form, of which 2.24 would have been detected on the iPad®. The iPad® increased the mean patient encounter time from 37.2 minutes to 46.5 minutes, but eliminated delay between a clinic visit and its data entry.

Conclusions: Entering data using the iPad® application makes the patient encounter slightly longer, but reduces “missing fields.” It also eliminates the delay between clinic visit and data entry thus improving the efficiency of clinical data capture in a research setting.

Keywords

Tablet computersData collectionData qualityResearch database
Type
Methods
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 31 , Issue 1-2 , 2015 , pp. 99 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Goldberg, SI, Niemierko, A, Turchin, A. Analysis of data errors in clinical research databases. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008;2008:242–246.Google ScholarPubMed
2. Kawado, M, Hinotsu, S, Matsuyama, Y, et al. A comparison of error detection rates between the reading aloud method and the double data entry method. Control Clin Trials. 2003;24:560–569.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Car, J, Black, A, Anandan, C, et al. The impact of eHealth on the quality & safety of healthcare a systematic overview & synthesis of the literature. Report for the NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme March 2008. http://www.pcpoh.bham.ac.uk/publichealth/cfhep/documents/NHS_CFHEP_001_Final_Report.pdf.Google Scholar
4. Greenhalgh, T, Potts, HWW, Wong, G, et al. Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: A systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. Milbank Q. 2009;87:729–788.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Black, AD, Car, J, Pagliari, C, et al. The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: A systematic overview. PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1000387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Haller, G, Haller, DM, Courvoisier, DS, et al. Handheld vs. laptop computers for electronic data collection in clinical research: A crossover randomized trial. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16:651–659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Walther, B, Hossin, S, Townend, J, et al. Comparison of electronic data capture (EDC) with the standard data capture method for clinical trial data. PLoS One. 2011;6:e25348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Häyrinen, K, Saranto, K, Nykänen, P. Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: A review of the research literature. Int J Med Inform. 2008;77:291–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Coffey, C, Wurster, LA, Groner, J, et al. A comparison of paper documentation to electronic documentation for trauma resuscitations at a level I pediatric trauma center. J Emerg Nurs. 2015;41:52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Sanders, DS, Read-Brown, S, Tu, DC, et al. Impact of an electronic health record operating room management system in ophthalmology on documentation time, surgical volume, and staffing. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014;132:586–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Ash, JS, Sittig, DF, Dykstra, R, et al. The unintended consequences of computerized provider order entry: Findings from a mixed methods exploration. Int J Med Inform. 2009;78 (Suppl 1):S69–S76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Campbell, EM, Sittig, DF, Ash, JS, et al. Types of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13:547–556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Carlson, E, Catrambone, C, Oder, K, et al. Point-of-care technology supports bedside documentation. J Nurs Adm. 2010;40:360–365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Archibald, D, Macdonald, CJ, Plante, J, et al. Residents’ and preceptors’ perceptions of the use of the iPad for clinical teaching in a family medicine residency program. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Boruff, JT, Storie, D. Mobile devices in medicine: A survey of how medical students, residents, and faculty use smartphones and other mobile devices to find information. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102:22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Gladman, DD, Chandran, V. Observational cohort studies: Lessons learnt from the University of Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Program. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50:25–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. VanDenKerkhof, EG, Goldstein, DH, Rimmer, MJ, et al. Evaluation of hand-held computers compared to pen and paper for documentation on an acute pain service. Acute Pain. 2004;6:115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Stengel, D, Bauwens, K, Walter, M, et al. Comparison of handheld computer-assisted and conventional paper chart documentation of medical records. A randomized, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:553–560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Cole, E, Pisano, ED, Clary, GJ, et al. A comparative study of mobile electronic data entry systems for clinical trials data collection. Int J Med Inform. 2006;75:722–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed