首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings >A comparison of a printed patient summary document with its electronic equivalent: early results.
【2h】

A comparison of a printed patient summary document with its electronic equivalent: early results.

机译:印刷的患者摘要文档及其等效电子文档的比较:早期结果。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Clinicians are always searching for efficient access to clinical data. The Regenstrief Medical Record System has a printed report that fills this niche: Pocket Rounds. Handheld computers may offer an alternative, but it is unclear how effectively a handheld computer can display such data. We surveyed residents and students on the general medicine services for their opinions regarding Pocket Rounds. Those with handheld computers were given access to an electronic version of Pocket Rounds-e-Rounds. We surveyed the subjects who used e-Rounds for their opinions on the electronic format and how it compared to paper. Users overall satisfaction with Pocket Rounds was 5.8 on a seven-point scale. User s overall satisfaction for e-Rounds was 5.6 on a seven-point scale. The most useful function was retrieval of lab data for both modalities. The results suggest that the electronic format is a viable alternative to paper. Further evaluation is needed, and we plan a prospective controlled trial to study this further.
机译:临床医生一直在寻找有效访问临床数据的途径。 Regenstrief病历系统的印刷报告填补了这一空白:Pocket Rounds。手持计算机可能提供了另一种选择,但是尚不清楚手持计算机如何有效显示此类数据。我们就普通医学服务对居民和学生进行了调查,以征询他们对Pocket Rounds的看法。那些拥有掌上电脑的人可以使用电子版本的Pocket Rounds-e-Rounds。我们调查了使用e-Rounds的受试者对电子格式及其与纸张相比的意见。用户对Pocket Round的总体满意度为七分制5.8。用户对e-Rounds的总体满意度为7.6(满分为7分)。最有用的功能是检索两种模式的实验室数据。结果表明,电子格式可以替代纸张。需要进一步的评估,我们计划进行一项前瞻性对照试验以进一步研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号