nurse anesthetist, is an asssociate professor at Østfold University College and a researcher at Østfold Hospital Trust, Viken, Norway. Email:
nurse anesthetist, is program coordinator for the masters' program in anesthesia and critical care nursing at the University of South-Eastern Norway, Notodden, Norway.
AANA J. 2021 Dec;89(6):509-514.
Traditionally, anesthetic records were in paper format. An increasing volume of complex data, legislation, and quality improvement initiatives related to clinical documentation have promoted the transition to digital records. Anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) have been designed to directly extract patient information from the anesthesia workstation and transmit the data into documentation systems and databases. The purpose of this review was to explore existing literature on anesthesia personnel's experiences with digital AIMS. Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, Embase, and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. A total of 473 records were identified, of which 40 records were read in full-text. Seven records underwent quality appraisal, representing research from 1991 to 2018, all with a quantitative design. In total, 379 anesthesia personnel were included. Five studies were conducted in the United States; 1, in Korea; and 1, in Germany. Results were collated into the themes user satisfaction, technical aspects, physical placement of the system, paper-based vs electronic data entry, quality of care, and suggestions for improvement. Findings indicate both positive and negative effects of AIMS. Anesthesia personnel's experiences should be included in the planning, development, and implementation of digital data entry systems.
传统上,麻醉记录采用纸质格式。由于与临床文档相关的大量复杂数据、法规和质量改进计划的增加,推动了向数字化记录的转变。麻醉信息管理系统(AIMS)旨在直接从麻醉工作站提取患者信息,并将数据传输到文档系统和数据库中。本综述的目的是探讨麻醉人员在使用数字 AIMS 方面的经验的现有文献。在 PubMed、Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature、Embase 和 The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 中进行了文献检索。共确定了 473 条记录,其中 40 条记录进行了全文阅读。经过质量评估,有 7 篇记录符合研究标准,代表了 1991 年至 2018 年的研究,均采用定量设计。共有 379 名麻醉人员参与。其中 5 项研究在美国进行,1 项在韩国进行,1 项在德国进行。结果被整理为用户满意度、技术方面、系统的物理位置、纸质与电子数据录入、护理质量以及改进建议等主题。研究结果表明 AIMS 既有积极影响,也有消极影响。在规划、开发和实施数字化数据录入系统时,应考虑麻醉人员的经验。