Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists
Objective Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2011-04, Vol.25 (2), p.129-135 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 135 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 129 |
container_title | Journal of clinical monitoring and computing |
container_volume | 25 |
creator | Trentman, Terrence L. Mueller, Jeff T. Ruskin, Keith J. Noble, Brie N. Doyle, Christine A. |
description | Objective
Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in non-academic settings. Herein, we report the results of a survey of US anesthesiologists regarding adoption of AIMS and anesthesiologist-perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS adoption.
Methods
Using the e-mail database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, we solicited randomly selected US anesthesiologists to participate in a survey of their AIMS adoption, perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS. Two and then 3 weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up e-mail was sent to each anesthesiologist. The study was closed 4 weeks after the initial mailing.
Results
Five thousand anesthesiologists were solicited; 615 (12.3%) responses were received. Twenty-four percent of respondents had installed an AIMS, while 13% were either installing a system now or had selected one, and an additional 13% were actively searching. Larger anesthesiology groups with large case loads, urban settings, and government affiliated or academic institutions were more likely to have adopted AIMS. Initial cost was the most frequently cited AIMS barrier. The most commonly cited benefit was more accurate clinical documentation (79%), while unanticipated need for ongoing information technology support (49%) and difficult integration of AIMS with an existing EMR (61%) were the most commonly cited problems. There were no barriers cited significantly more often by non-adopters than adopters.
Conclusions
At least 50% of our survey respondents were currently using, installing, planning to install, or searching for an AIMS. However, the strength of any conclusion is undermined by a low survey response rate and potential bias as respondents using or searching for an AIMS may be more likely to participate. Nonetheless, challenges exist for anesthesiologists considering AIMS adoption including cost. Furthermore, important questions remain regarding payment for anesthesia services and the relationship of AIMS and “meaningful use” as defined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_907938370</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>879483264</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-41100bbe75b47a7f939788d715f21fa2ebf1d3bb110a81c3c8cb29b16c8f1a753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0VFrFDEQB_Aglra2_QC-yCKIT6uZJHuTPJZiq1DxQfscklxybtndnJk96H17097VA0F8SmB-M5nwZ-w18A_AOX4k4Bqx5QCtEdq0Dy_YKXQoW7EA9bLepcYWJMcT9oronnNutIRjdiIAheYdnrKvl8u8nvs8NTk1boo0_4zUu6afUi6je6qMbnKrOMZpbmhLcxyp8dvm7vvB5yGveprpnB0lN1C82J9n7O7604-rz-3tt5svV5e3bVBSzK2Cur73ETuv0GEy0qDWS4QuCUhORJ9gKb2vzGkIMujghfGwCDqBw06esfe7ueuSf23qEnbsKcRhqBvlDVnD0Ugtkf9XajRKS7FQVb79S97nTZnqNyrSZiGgkxXBDoWSiUpMdl360ZWtBW4fM7G7TGzNxD5mYh9qz5v94I0f4_JPx3MIFbzbA0fBDam4KfR0cEqB0mCqEztHtTStYjls-O_XfwP5yKRg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>878962153</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Trentman, Terrence L. ; Mueller, Jeff T. ; Ruskin, Keith J. ; Noble, Brie N. ; Doyle, Christine A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Trentman, Terrence L. ; Mueller, Jeff T. ; Ruskin, Keith J. ; Noble, Brie N. ; Doyle, Christine A.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in non-academic settings. Herein, we report the results of a survey of US anesthesiologists regarding adoption of AIMS and anesthesiologist-perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS adoption.
Methods
Using the e-mail database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, we solicited randomly selected US anesthesiologists to participate in a survey of their AIMS adoption, perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS. Two and then 3 weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up e-mail was sent to each anesthesiologist. The study was closed 4 weeks after the initial mailing.
Results
Five thousand anesthesiologists were solicited; 615 (12.3%) responses were received. Twenty-four percent of respondents had installed an AIMS, while 13% were either installing a system now or had selected one, and an additional 13% were actively searching. Larger anesthesiology groups with large case loads, urban settings, and government affiliated or academic institutions were more likely to have adopted AIMS. Initial cost was the most frequently cited AIMS barrier. The most commonly cited benefit was more accurate clinical documentation (79%), while unanticipated need for ongoing information technology support (49%) and difficult integration of AIMS with an existing EMR (61%) were the most commonly cited problems. There were no barriers cited significantly more often by non-adopters than adopters.
Conclusions
At least 50% of our survey respondents were currently using, installing, planning to install, or searching for an AIMS. However, the strength of any conclusion is undermined by a low survey response rate and potential bias as respondents using or searching for an AIMS may be more likely to participate. Nonetheless, challenges exist for anesthesiologists considering AIMS adoption including cost. Furthermore, important questions remain regarding payment for anesthesia services and the relationship of AIMS and “meaningful use” as defined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1387-1307</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-2614</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21728057</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCMCFG</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Anesthesia ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Anesthesia: equipment, devices ; Anesthesiology ; Anesthesiology - methods ; Barriers ; Biological and medical sciences ; Critical Care Medicine ; Data Collection ; Diffusion of Innovation ; Electronic mail ; Electronics ; Email ; Health Sciences ; Humans ; Information Management ; Intensive ; Intensive care medicine ; Management Information Systems ; Medical Records Systems, Computerized - organization & administration ; Medical Records Systems, Computerized - statistics & numerical data ; Medical sciences ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Practice Patterns, Physicians ; Searching ; Statistics for Life Sciences ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; United States</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2011-04, Vol.25 (2), p.129-135</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-41100bbe75b47a7f939788d715f21fa2ebf1d3bb110a81c3c8cb29b16c8f1a753</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-41100bbe75b47a7f939788d715f21fa2ebf1d3bb110a81c3c8cb29b16c8f1a753</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906,41469,42538,51300</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=24414819$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21728057$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Trentman, Terrence L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mueller, Jeff T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruskin, Keith J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Noble, Brie N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doyle, Christine A.</creatorcontrib><title>Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists</title><title>Journal of clinical monitoring and computing</title><addtitle>J Clin Monit Comput</addtitle><addtitle>J Clin Monit Comput</addtitle><description>Objective
Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in non-academic settings. Herein, we report the results of a survey of US anesthesiologists regarding adoption of AIMS and anesthesiologist-perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS adoption.
Methods
Using the e-mail database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, we solicited randomly selected US anesthesiologists to participate in a survey of their AIMS adoption, perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS. Two and then 3 weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up e-mail was sent to each anesthesiologist. The study was closed 4 weeks after the initial mailing.
Results
Five thousand anesthesiologists were solicited; 615 (12.3%) responses were received. Twenty-four percent of respondents had installed an AIMS, while 13% were either installing a system now or had selected one, and an additional 13% were actively searching. Larger anesthesiology groups with large case loads, urban settings, and government affiliated or academic institutions were more likely to have adopted AIMS. Initial cost was the most frequently cited AIMS barrier. The most commonly cited benefit was more accurate clinical documentation (79%), while unanticipated need for ongoing information technology support (49%) and difficult integration of AIMS with an existing EMR (61%) were the most commonly cited problems. There were no barriers cited significantly more often by non-adopters than adopters.
Conclusions
At least 50% of our survey respondents were currently using, installing, planning to install, or searching for an AIMS. However, the strength of any conclusion is undermined by a low survey response rate and potential bias as respondents using or searching for an AIMS may be more likely to participate. Nonetheless, challenges exist for anesthesiologists considering AIMS adoption including cost. Furthermore, important questions remain regarding payment for anesthesia services and the relationship of AIMS and “meaningful use” as defined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.</description><subject>Anesthesia</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Anesthesia: equipment, devices</subject><subject>Anesthesiology</subject><subject>Anesthesiology - methods</subject><subject>Barriers</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Critical Care Medicine</subject><subject>Data Collection</subject><subject>Diffusion of Innovation</subject><subject>Electronic mail</subject><subject>Electronics</subject><subject>Email</subject><subject>Health Sciences</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Information Management</subject><subject>Intensive</subject><subject>Intensive care medicine</subject><subject>Management Information Systems</subject><subject>Medical Records Systems, Computerized - organization & administration</subject><subject>Medical Records Systems, Computerized - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Practice Patterns, Physicians</subject><subject>Searching</subject><subject>Statistics for Life Sciences</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>1387-1307</issn><issn>1573-2614</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0VFrFDEQB_Aglra2_QC-yCKIT6uZJHuTPJZiq1DxQfscklxybtndnJk96H17097VA0F8SmB-M5nwZ-w18A_AOX4k4Bqx5QCtEdq0Dy_YKXQoW7EA9bLepcYWJMcT9oronnNutIRjdiIAheYdnrKvl8u8nvs8NTk1boo0_4zUu6afUi6je6qMbnKrOMZpbmhLcxyp8dvm7vvB5yGveprpnB0lN1C82J9n7O7604-rz-3tt5svV5e3bVBSzK2Cur73ETuv0GEy0qDWS4QuCUhORJ9gKb2vzGkIMujghfGwCDqBw06esfe7ueuSf23qEnbsKcRhqBvlDVnD0Ugtkf9XajRKS7FQVb79S97nTZnqNyrSZiGgkxXBDoWSiUpMdl360ZWtBW4fM7G7TGzNxD5mYh9qz5v94I0f4_JPx3MIFbzbA0fBDam4KfR0cEqB0mCqEztHtTStYjls-O_XfwP5yKRg</recordid><startdate>20110401</startdate><enddate>20110401</enddate><creator>Trentman, Terrence L.</creator><creator>Mueller, Jeff T.</creator><creator>Ruskin, Keith J.</creator><creator>Noble, Brie N.</creator><creator>Doyle, Christine A.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110401</creationdate><title>Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists</title><author>Trentman, Terrence L. ; Mueller, Jeff T. ; Ruskin, Keith J. ; Noble, Brie N. ; Doyle, Christine A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-41100bbe75b47a7f939788d715f21fa2ebf1d3bb110a81c3c8cb29b16c8f1a753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Anesthesia</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Anesthesia: equipment, devices</topic><topic>Anesthesiology</topic><topic>Anesthesiology - methods</topic><topic>Barriers</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Critical Care Medicine</topic><topic>Data Collection</topic><topic>Diffusion of Innovation</topic><topic>Electronic mail</topic><topic>Electronics</topic><topic>Email</topic><topic>Health Sciences</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Information Management</topic><topic>Intensive</topic><topic>Intensive care medicine</topic><topic>Management Information Systems</topic><topic>Medical Records Systems, Computerized - organization & administration</topic><topic>Medical Records Systems, Computerized - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Practice Patterns, Physicians</topic><topic>Searching</topic><topic>Statistics for Life Sciences</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Trentman, Terrence L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mueller, Jeff T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruskin, Keith J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Noble, Brie N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doyle, Christine A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical monitoring and computing</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Trentman, Terrence L.</au><au>Mueller, Jeff T.</au><au>Ruskin, Keith J.</au><au>Noble, Brie N.</au><au>Doyle, Christine A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical monitoring and computing</jtitle><stitle>J Clin Monit Comput</stitle><addtitle>J Clin Monit Comput</addtitle><date>2011-04-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>129</spage><epage>135</epage><pages>129-135</pages><issn>1387-1307</issn><eissn>1573-2614</eissn><coden>JCMCFG</coden><abstract>Objective
Electronic medical records (EMR) may increase the safety and efficiency of healthcare. Anesthesia care is a significant component of the perioperative period, yet little is known about the adoption of anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) by US anesthesiologists, particularly in non-academic settings. Herein, we report the results of a survey of US anesthesiologists regarding adoption of AIMS and anesthesiologist-perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS adoption.
Methods
Using the e-mail database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, we solicited randomly selected US anesthesiologists to participate in a survey of their AIMS adoption, perceived advantages and barriers to AIMS. Two and then 3 weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up e-mail was sent to each anesthesiologist. The study was closed 4 weeks after the initial mailing.
Results
Five thousand anesthesiologists were solicited; 615 (12.3%) responses were received. Twenty-four percent of respondents had installed an AIMS, while 13% were either installing a system now or had selected one, and an additional 13% were actively searching. Larger anesthesiology groups with large case loads, urban settings, and government affiliated or academic institutions were more likely to have adopted AIMS. Initial cost was the most frequently cited AIMS barrier. The most commonly cited benefit was more accurate clinical documentation (79%), while unanticipated need for ongoing information technology support (49%) and difficult integration of AIMS with an existing EMR (61%) were the most commonly cited problems. There were no barriers cited significantly more often by non-adopters than adopters.
Conclusions
At least 50% of our survey respondents were currently using, installing, planning to install, or searching for an AIMS. However, the strength of any conclusion is undermined by a low survey response rate and potential bias as respondents using or searching for an AIMS may be more likely to participate. Nonetheless, challenges exist for anesthesiologists considering AIMS adoption including cost. Furthermore, important questions remain regarding payment for anesthesia services and the relationship of AIMS and “meaningful use” as defined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>21728057</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1387-1307 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2011-04, Vol.25 (2), p.129-135 |
issn | 1387-1307 1573-2614 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_907938370 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
subjects | Anesthesia Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Anesthesia: equipment, devices Anesthesiology Anesthesiology - methods Barriers Biological and medical sciences Critical Care Medicine Data Collection Diffusion of Innovation Electronic mail Electronics Health Sciences Humans Information Management Intensive Intensive care medicine Management Information Systems Medical Records Systems, Computerized - organization & administration Medical Records Systems, Computerized - statistics & numerical data Medical sciences Medicine Medicine & Public Health Practice Patterns, Physicians Searching Statistics for Life Sciences Surveys and Questionnaires United States |
title | Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by US anesthesiologists |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T09%3A19%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Adoption%20of%20anesthesia%20information%20management%20systems%20by%20US%20anesthesiologists&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20monitoring%20and%20computing&rft.au=Trentman,%20Terrence%20L.&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=129&rft.epage=135&rft.pages=129-135&rft.issn=1387-1307&rft.eissn=1573-2614&rft.coden=JCMCFG&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10877-011-9289-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E879483264%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=878962153&rft_id=info:pmid/21728057&rfr_iscdi=true |