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

Abstract

PURPOSEWe compared the completeness of data collection using paper forms and using electronic forms loaded on handheld computers in an offi ce-based patient interview survey conducted within the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. METHODSWe 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 fi rst. 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 diffi culties 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 diffi culties with the handheld 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.

In This Issue: What Patients Value and How to Provide It

“…A randomized trial by Galliher and colleagues 7 compares the use of handheld computers with paper forms for data collection in a national practice-based research network. They fi nd interesting tradeoffs between the 2 data collection methods.…”

“…[3][4][5] Four studies in this issue are from outside the United States, 1,3,4,5 and 1 shows the negative effects of acculturation to the United States. 6 This issue also features 2 studies of innovative primary care research methods, 7,8 and several other studies instruct us in novel methods by applying them to interesting questions. [1][2][3][4]9 The US Preventive Services Task Force provides us with 2 updates, 10,11 and a clinical trial tests a simple intervention hypothesized to reduce infl ammatory markers.…”

Tablet computers for recording tuberculosis data at a community health centre in King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Municipality, Eastern Cape: a proof of concept report

“…8 Another US study on an anaesthetic service showed that a PDA was more effi cient, in terms of time taken and data completeness, in collecting data, than pen and paper. 9 Studies undertaken in developing countries showed similar results.…”

Computerised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health assessments in primary health care research

“…Computerised medical record systems are less likely to result in missing clinical data than paper-based systems 248 which has been associated with fewer adverse events in Australian general practice. 249 Fewer missing data are also likely to improve the quality of research information derived from clinic data.…”

“…48,49 In addition to other benefits of computerised HAs described in Chapter 5, research data collected using computerised forms may be less likely to result in item non-response compared with paper-based forms. 248 …”