Data Collection Outcomes Comparing Paper Forms With PDA Forms in an Office-Based Patient Survey

PURPOSE We compared the completeness of data collection using paper forms and using electronic forms loaded on handheld computers in an office-based patient interview survey conducted within the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. METHODS We asked 19 medical assistants and nurses in family practices to administer a survey about pneumococcal immunizations to 60 older adults each, 30 using paper forms and 30 using electronic forms on handheld computers. By random assignment, the interviewers used either the paper or electronic form first. Using multilevel analyses adjusted for patient characteristics and clustering of forms by practice, we analyzed the completeness of the data. RESULTS A total of 1,003 of the expected 1,140 forms were returned to the data center. The overall return rate was better for paper forms (537 of 570, 94%) than for electronic forms (466 of 570, 82%) because of technical difficulties experienced with electronic data collection and stolen or lost handheld computers. Errors of omission on the returned forms, however, were more common using paper forms. Of the returned forms, only 3% of those gathered electronically had errors of omission, compared with 35% of those gathered on paper. Similarly, only 0.04% of total survey items were missing on the electronic forms, compared with 3.5% of the survey items using paper forms. CONCLUSIONS Although handheld computers produced more complete data than the paper method for the returned forms, they were not superior because of the large amount of missing data due to technical difficulties with the hand-held computers or loss or theft. Other hardware solutions, such as tablet computers or cell phones linked via a wireless network directly to a Web site, may be better electronic solutions for the future.

[1]  Karim Keshavjee,et al.  Technology Failure Analysis: Understanding Why A Diabetes Management Tool Developed for A Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) Didn't Work in a Randomized Control Trial , 2003, AMIA.

[2]  William B. Webb,et al.  Prospective study of clinician-entered research data in the Emergency Department using an Internet-based system after the HIPAA Privacy Rule , 2004, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[3]  T. Heeren,et al.  A cross-national study of acute otitis media: risk factors, severity, and treatment at initial visit. Report from the International Primary Care Network (IPCN) and the Ambulatory Sentinel Practice Network (ASPN). , 2001, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[4]  D. Goldstein,et al.  A Comparison of Paper with Electronic Patient-Completed Questionnaires in a Preoperative Clinic , 2005, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[5]  M Curl,et al.  Hand-held computers in clinical audit: a comparison with established paper and pencil methods. , 1994, International journal of health care quality assurance.

[6]  A M Grant,et al.  Evaluation of the Newton Pen-Pad as a tool for collecting clinical research data at the bed-side. , 1996, Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium.

[7]  A B Tattersall,et al.  The Use of a Hand-Held Computer to Record Clinical Trial Data in General Practice: A Pilot Study , 1989, The Journal of international medical research.

[8]  P. Froom,et al.  Opportunities, Challenges, and Lessons of International Research in Practice-Based Research Networks: The Case of an International Study of Acute Otitis Media , 2004, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[9]  R. Littell SAS System for Mixed Models , 1996 .

[10]  J. Bahnson,et al.  Using a hand-held computer to collect data in an orthopedic outpatient clinic: a randomized trial of two survey methods. , 1999, Medical care.

[11]  P Burnard Data collection using a palm-top computer. , 1995, Professional nurse.

[12]  Wilson D. Pace,et al.  Electronic Data Collection Options for Practice-Based Research Networks , 2005, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[13]  O. Dale,et al.  Despite technical problems personal digital assistants outperform pen and paper when collecting patient diary data. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[14]  Sherry Holcomb,et al.  Exploring Patient Reactions to Pen-Tablet Computers: A Report from CaReNet , 2004, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[15]  David Wypij,et al.  Short report: Piloting paperless data entry for clinical research in Africa. , 2005, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.