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

ObjectivesTo determine if data collected through digital charting are more complete and more accurate compared to traditional paper-based charting during simulated pediatric cardiac arrest.MethodsWe 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.ResultsCharting 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.ConclusionCompared 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. ObjectifsDeterminer si les donnees recueillies au moyen de la cartographie numerique sont plus completes et plus precises que celles recueillies sur papier lors d'un arret cardiaque pediatrique simule.MethodesNous avons realise un essai controle randomise base sur une simulation a centre unique. Les participants ont ete affectes par randomisation a un nouvel appareil de cartographie numerique portatif (groupe d'intervention) ou au tableau papier standard de reanimation (groupe temoin). Les participants ont documente deux scenarios simules d'arret cardiaque pediatrique de 15 min. Nous avons compare l'exhaustivite des dossiers entre les deux groupes. Le score d'exhaustivite (resultat principal) a ete etabli en calculant un score d'exhaustivite pour chaque groupe en fonction d'une liste de taches critiques predeterminees. La precision des graphiques (resultat secondaire) a ete comparee entre les deux groupes, definie comme l'intervalle de temps entre la performance de la tache en temps reel et le temps represente sur la carte.ResultatsLes donnees cartographiques de 34 arrets cardiaques simules ont ete incluses dans l'analyse (n = 18 interventions; n = 16 controles). Le groupe de la cartographie papier avait un score d'exhaustivite plus eleve (papier median (IQR) que numerique: 72,0% (66,4-76,9%) contre 65,0% (58,5-66,4%), p = 0,015). Pour des raisons de precision, le groupe de cartographie numerique etait superieur au groupe de cartographie papier pour toutes les taches critiques preetablies.ConclusionPar rapport a la cartographie sur papier, le groupe de cartographie numerique a capture des taches plus critiques lors de la reanimation pediatrique simulee et etait plus precis dans les intervalles de temps entre les performances des taches en temps reel et le temps cartographie. Pour les taches cartographiees, les dossiers papier etaient significativement plus complets et plus detailles lors de l'arret cardiaque pediatrique simule.

Automated summary

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