Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Completeness and accuracy of digital charting vs paper charting in simulated pediatric cardiac arrest: a randomized controlled trial

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To determine if data collected through digital charting are more complete and more accurate compared to traditional paper-based charting during simulated pediatric cardiac arrest.

Methods

We performed a single-center simulation-based randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to a novel handheld digital charting device (intervention group) or to the standard resuscitation paper chart (control group). Participants documented two 15-min simulated pediatric cardiac arrest scenarios. We compared the charting completeness between the two groups. Completeness score (primary outcome) was established by calculating a completeness score for each group based on a list of pre-determined critical tasks. Charting accuracy (secondary outcome) was compared between the two groups, defined as the time interval between the real-time task performance and charted time.

Results

Charting data from 34 simulated cardiac arrest events were included in the analysis (n = 18 intervention; n = 16 control). The paper charting group had a higher completeness score (median (IQR) paper vs digital: 72.0% (66.4–76.9%) vs 65.0% (58.5–66.4%), p = 0.015). For accuracy, the digital charting group was superior to the paper charting group for all pre-established critical tasks.

Conclusion

Compared to paper-based charting, digital charting group captured more critical tasks during pediatric simulated resuscitation and was more accurate in the time intervals between real-time tasks performance and charted time. For tasks charted, paper-based charting was significantly more complete and more detailed during simulated pediatric cardiac arrest.

Résumé

Objectifs

Déterminer si les données recueillies au moyen de la cartographie numérique sont plus complètes et plus précises que celles recueillies sur papier lors d’un arrêt cardiaque pédiatrique simulé.

Méthodes

Nous avons réalisé un essai contrôlé randomisé basé sur une simulation à centre unique. Les participants ont été affectés par randomisation à un nouvel appareil de cartographie numérique portatif (groupe d’intervention) ou au tableau papier standard de réanimation (groupe témoin). Les participants ont documenté deux scénarios simulés d’arrêt cardiaque pédiatrique de 15 min. Nous avons comparé l’exhaustivité des dossiers entre les deux groupes. Le score d’exhaustivité (résultat principal) a été établi en calculant un score d’exhaustivité pour chaque groupe en fonction d’une liste de tâches critiques prédéterminées. La précision des graphiques (résultat secondaire) a été comparée entre les deux groupes, définie comme l’intervalle de temps entre la performance de la tâche en temps réel et le temps représenté sur la carte.

Résultats

Les données cartographiques de 34 arrêts cardiaques simulés ont été incluses dans l’analyse (n = 18 interventions; n = 16 contrôles). Le groupe de la cartographie papier avait un score d’exhaustivité plus élevé (papier médian (IQR) que numérique: 72,0% (66,4–76,9%) contre 65,0% (58,5–66,4%), p = 0,015). Pour des raisons de précision, le groupe de cartographie numérique était supérieur au groupe de cartographie papier pour toutes les tâches critiques préétablies.

Conclusion

Par rapport à la cartographie sur papier, le groupe de cartographie numérique a capturé des tâches plus critiques lors de la réanimation pédiatrique simulée et était plus précis dans les intervalles de temps entre les performances des tâches en temps réel et le temps cartographié. Pour les tâches cartographiées, les dossiers papier étaient significativement plus complets et plus détaillés lors de l’arrêt cardiaque pédiatrique simulé.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CPR:

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation

BLS:

Basic life support

PALS:

Pediatric advanced life support

ACLS:

Advanced cardiac life support

References

  1. Merchant RM, Topjian AA, Panchal AR, Cheng A, Aziz K, Berg KM, et al. Part 1: executive summary: 2020 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation. 2020;2020:142.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Meaney PA, Bobrow BJ, Mancini ME, Christenson J, de Caen AR, Bhanji F, et al. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality: improving cardiac resuscitation outcomes both inside and outside the hospital: a consensus statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2013;128:417–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wolfe HA, Morgan RW, Zhang B, Topjian AA, Fink EL, Berg RA, et al. Deviations from AHA guidelines during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation are associated with decreased event survival. Resuscitation. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.01.035.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Wolfe H, Zebuhr C, Topjian AA, Nishisaki A, Niles DE, Meaney PA, et al. Interdisciplinary ICU cardiac arrest debriefing improves survival outcomes*. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:1688–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Couper K, Salman B, Soar J, Finn J, Perkins GD. Debriefing to improve outcomes from critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intens Care Med. 2013;39:1513–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hunt EA, Jeffers J, McNamara L, Newton H, Ford K, Bernier M, et al. Improved cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance with CODE ACES(2): a resuscitation quality bundle. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7: e009860.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Su L, Waller M, Kaplan S, Watson A, Jones M, Wessel DL. Cardiac resuscitation events: one eyewitness is not enough. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2015;16:335–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bilyeu P, Eastes L. Use of the electronic medical record for trauma resuscitations: how does this impact documentation completeness? J Trauma Nurs. 2013;20:166–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Coffey C, Wurster LA, Groner J, Hoffman J, Hendren V, Nuss K, et al. A comparison of paper documentation to electronic documentation for trauma resuscitations at a Level I pediatric trauma center. J Emerg Nurs. 2015;41:52–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cheng A, Kessler D, Mackinnon R, Chang TP, Nadkarni VM, Hunt EA, et al. Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research: extensions to the CONSORT and STROBE statements. Simul Healthc. 2016;11:238–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cheng A, Brown LL, Duff JP, Davidson J, Overly F, Tofil NM, et al. Improving cardiopulmonary resuscitation with a CPR feedback device and refresher simulations (CPR CARES Study): a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169:137–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cheng A, Duff JP, Kessler D, Tofil NM, Davidson J, Lin Y, et al. Optimizing CPR performance with CPR coaching for pediatric cardiac arrest: a randomized simulation-based clinical trial. Resuscitation. 2018;132:33–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Topjian AA, Raymond TT, Atkins D, Chan M, Duff JP, Joyner BL, et al. Part 4: pediatric basic and advanced life support: 2020 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation. 2020;2020:142.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting excellence and reflective learning in simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simul Healthc. 2015;10:106–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sukul D, Kamphuis LA, Iwashyna TJ, Bradley SM, Chan PS, Sinha SS, et al. Clinical documentation of in-hospital cardiac arrest in a large national health system. Resuscitation. 2017;112:e9–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bakhsh AA, Bakhsh AR, Karamelahi ZA, Bakhsh AA, Alzahrani AM, Alsharif LM, et al. Communicating resuscitation. The importance of documentation in cardiac arrest. Saudi Med J. 2018;39:261–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Jang J, Yu SH, Kim C-B, Moon Y, Kim S. The effects of an electronic medical record on the completeness of documentation in the anesthesia record. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82:702–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tierney S. The utilisation of a structured debriefing framework within the pre-hospital environment: a service evaluation. Br Paramed J. 2018;3:8–15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Tannenbaum SI, Cerasoli CP. Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Hum Factors. 2013;55:231–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by a research grant provided by the Alberta Children’s Hospital Research Institute and the Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Alexandra St-Onge-St-Hilaire & Adam Cheng

  2. KidSIM-ASPIRE Simulation Research Program, Alberta Children’s Hospital, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Adam Cheng, Jennifer Davidson, Brandi Wan & Yiqun Lin

Authors
  1. Alexandra St-Onge-St-Hilaire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer Davidson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Brandi Wan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yiqun Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yiqun Lin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Cheng reports grants from Alberta Children’s Hospital Research Institute and the Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation during the conduct of the study. Dr. Adam Cheng is a volunteer for the American Heart Association (Resuscitation Education Writing Group) and the International Liaison Committee for Resuscitation (Vice Chair; EIT Task Force). Dr. Yiqun Lin is a volunteer for the American Heart Association (Resuscitation Education Writing Group) and the International Liaison Committee for Resuscitation (Member; EIT Task Force). The authors have no other relevant financial disclosures or conflicts of interest to declare.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

St-Onge-St-Hilaire, A., Cheng, A., Davidson, J. et al. Completeness and accuracy of digital charting vs paper charting in simulated pediatric cardiac arrest: a randomized controlled trial. Can J Emerg Med 26, 94–102 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00624-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00624-w

Keywords

Mots-clés

Search

Navigation