Anesthesia Information Management Systems in the Czech Republic from the Perspective of Early Adopters
Language English Country United States Media electronic
Document type Journal Article
PubMed
32072350
DOI
10.1007/s10916-020-1545-5
PII: 10.1007/s10916-020-1545-5
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- AIMS, Anesthesia, Information system,
- MeSH
- Anesthesiology economics organization & administration standards MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Motivation MeSH
- Costs and Cost Analysis MeSH
- Hospital Information Systems economics organization & administration standards MeSH
- Academic Medical Centers organization & administration MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic MeSH
Although theoretical studies on Anesthesia Information Management Systems (AIMS) have proved their benefits, much less attention has been paid to researching the actual adoption of AIMS. Only a few studies from the USA and Western Europe have been published up to now. The purpose of this article is to assess the adoption, motivation for, and barriers to, usage of AIMS from the perspective of early Czech adopters of these systems. A questionnaire was used to gather adopters' views on motivating factors, benefits encountered after introduction and obstacles perceived to adopting AIMS. Data about usage, costs and functionalities of each of the AIMS was obtained using semi-structured telephone interviews prior to sending out the questionnaire. Five AIMS from three different vendors in four academic hospitals (20% of Czech hospitals of this type) were identified. Improved clinical documentation and convenience for anesthesiologists was reported from every site. Lack of funds, however, was identified as the primary barrier to further adoption. The cost of introduction of AIMS per operating room varied between 1000 and 40,000 US dollars. Although the number of AIMS in the Czech Republic is limited, findings suggest that benefits have been experienced on every site. Findings corroborate previous studies from the USA and Western Europe.
See more in PubMed
Anesthesiology. 1997 May;86(5):1161-9 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2008 Oct;107(4):1323-9 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2010 Nov;111(5):1293-300 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2018 Jan;126(1):322-329 PubMed
J Clin Monit Comput. 2017 Oct;31(5):885-894 PubMed
J Clin Anesth. 1993 Jul-Aug;5(4):275-83 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2008 Mar;106(3):893-8, table of contents PubMed
J Clin Monit Comput. 2019 Jun;33(3):541-542 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2000 Sep;91(3):612-6 PubMed
Br J Anaesth. 1995 May;74(5):619-26 PubMed
J Clin Monit. 1988 Jan;4(1):37-47 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2015 Sep;121(3):693-706 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2014 Mar;118(3):644-50 PubMed
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010 Feb;27(2):202-8 PubMed
Anesthesiol Clin. 2011 Sep;29(3):355-65 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2017 Feb;124(2):603-617 PubMed
Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 1975;23 Suppl:200-4 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2007 Jun;104(6):1462-6, table of contents PubMed
Anesthesiol Clin. 2008 Dec;26(4):665-79, vi PubMed
J Clin Anesth. 2013 Aug;25(5):425-427 PubMed
Anesthesiol Clin. 2011 Sep;29(3):367-75 PubMed
Anesth Analg. 2004 Sep;99(3):840-3, table of contents PubMed
Change Management and Digital Innovations in Hospitals of Five European Countries
