Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Canada.
Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Canada.
Vaccine. 2014 May 13;32(23):2748-55. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.11.015. Epub 2013 Nov 17.
As part of a series of feasibility studies following the development of Canadian vaccine barcode standards, we compared barcode scanning with manual methods for entering vaccine data into electronic client immunization records in public health settings.
Two software vendors incorporated barcode scanning functionality into their systems so that Algoma Public Health (APH) in Ontario and four First Nations (FN) communities in Alberta could participate in our study. We compared the recording of client immunization data (vaccine name, lot number, expiry date) using barcode scanning of vaccine vials vs. pre-existing methods of entering vaccine information into the systems. We employed time and motion methodology to evaluate time required for data recording, record audits to assess data quality, and qualitative analysis of immunization staff interviews to gauge user perceptions.
We conducted both studies between July and November 2012, with 628 (282 barcoded) vials processed for the APH study, and 749 (408 barcoded) vials for the study in FN communities. Barcode scanning led to significantly fewer immunization record errors than using drop-down menus (APH study: 0% vs. 1.7%; p=0.04) or typing in vaccine data (FN study: 0% vs. 5.6%; p<0.001). There was no significant difference in time to enter vaccine data between scanning and using drop-down menus (27.6s vs. 26.3s; p=0.39), but scanning was significantly faster than typing data into the record (30.3s vs. 41.3s; p<0.001). Seventeen immunization nurses were interviewed; all noted improved record accuracy with scanning, but the majority felt that a more sensitive scanner was needed to reduce the occasional failures to read the 2D barcodes on some vaccines.
Entering vaccine data into immunization records through barcode scanning led to improved data quality, and was generally well received. Further work is needed to improve barcode readability, particularly for unit-dose vials.
作为开发加拿大疫苗条码标准系列可行性研究的一部分，我们比较了条码扫描与手动输入电子客户端免疫记录中疫苗数据的方法，以适用于公共卫生环境。
两家软件供应商将条码扫描功能集成到他们的系统中，使安大略省的阿尔戈马公共卫生部门（APH）和艾伯塔省的四个原住民社区（FN）能够参与我们的研究。我们比较了使用疫苗小瓶的条码扫描记录客户端免疫数据（疫苗名称、批号、有效期）与将疫苗信息预先输入系统的现有方法。我们采用时间和动作方法评估数据记录所需的时间，记录审核评估数据质量，以及对免疫工作人员访谈的定性分析，以评估用户的看法。
我们在 2012 年 7 月至 11 月之间进行了这两项研究，APH 研究处理了 628 个（282 个条码）小瓶，FN 社区研究处理了 749 个（408 个条码）小瓶。条码扫描导致的免疫记录错误明显少于使用下拉菜单（APH 研究：0%比 1.7%；p=0.04）或输入疫苗数据（FN 研究：0%比 5.6%；p<0.001）。扫描与使用下拉菜单输入疫苗数据之间的时间没有显著差异（27.6s 比 26.3s；p=0.39），但扫描比将数据输入记录的速度快（30.3s 比 41.3s；p<0.001）。我们采访了 17 名免疫护士；所有人都指出，扫描可提高记录的准确性，但大多数人认为需要更灵敏的扫描仪来减少偶尔无法读取某些疫苗二维条码的情况。
通过条码扫描将疫苗数据输入免疫记录可提高数据质量，并且普遍受到欢迎。需要进一步改进条码可读性，特别是对于单位剂量小瓶。
