Abstract
Eight physiological variables—tidal volume, breathing rate, end-tidal carbon dioxide fraction, oxygen fraction in the anesthetic circuit, oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate—recorded on-line by a commercially available automated system were compared with the same variables recorded on handwritten anesthesia records. We quantified the differences between the automated and handwritten records generated from the same 30 patients (2,412 minutes of general anesthesia for elective eye surgical procedures). Considering the design of the study, we claim that the differences between both records were caused by the incompleteness or inaccuracy of the handwirtten records, except in two instances. The amounts of missing or erroneous data for these eight physiological variables were expressed as fraction (“error fractions”) of the time being recorded, designated EFm and EFe, respectively. For the first five variables the EFm on the handwritten records ranged between 0.23 and 0.31, and the EFc ranged between 0.01 and 0.06. For the last three variables the EFm range was 0.08 to 0.13, and the EFe range was 0.05 to 0.11. Most of these missing or erroneous data occurred during the period of induction (first 15 minutes) and at the end of the case (last 10 minutes). The EFm and EFe during induction had increased to 0.62 and 0.26, respectively, and to 0.76 and 0.06, respectively, at the end of the case. Erroneous data were observed on the automated records for the tidal volume during induction (EFe=0.0044) and for the oxygen fraction during maintenance (EFe=0.0024). The effect of averaging by the recordkeeper is discussed. The results of this study indicate the clinical relevance of automated record keeping.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Griffith HR. Some practical observations on general anesthesia. Classical file. Surv Anesthesiol 1985;29:362
Smith NT. Automated anesthetic record keeping. In: Osswald PM, ed. Computers in critical care and pulmonary medicine. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1985:147–161
Noel TA II. Computerized anesthesia records may be dangerous. Anesthesiology 1986;64:300. Letter
Zollinger RM, Kreul JF, Schneider AJL. Man-made versus computer-generated anesthesia records. J Surg Res 1977;22:419–424
Sy WP. Ulnar nerve palsy possibly related to use of automatically cycled blood pressure cuff. Anesth Analg 1981;60:687–688.
Schneider AJL. Automated systems. In: Gravenstein JS, Newbower RS, Ream AK, et al, eds. Monitoring surgical patients in the operating room. Springfield, IL: Thomas, 1979:159–169
Cooper JB, Newbower RS, Kitz RJ. An analysis of major errors and equipment failures in anesthesia management: considerations for prevention and detection. Anesthesiology 1984;60:34–42
Rosen AS, Rosenzweig W. On computerized anesthesia records. Anesthesiology 1986;65:131. Letter
Sarnat AJ. Do not fear computerized anesthesia records. Anesthesiology 1986;65:132. Letter
Dirksen R, Lerou J, van Daele M, et al. The clinical use of the Ohmeda automated anesthesia record keeper integrated in the Modulus II anesthesia system: a preliminary report. Int J Clin Monit Comp 1987;4:135–139
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lerou, J.G.C., Dirksen, R., van Daele, M. et al. Automated charting of physiological variables in anesthesia: A quantitative comparison of automated versus handwritten anesthesia records. J Clin Monitor Comput 4, 37–47 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01618106
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01618106