The Capability for the Automatic Electronic Anesthesia Recording System Interpretation among Non-anesthesia Medical Personnel

Main Article Content

Nantanut Saiyarin
Sirinya Naratcharlyangkoon
Rungruedee Jansin
Phuping Akavipat


Introduction: The automatic electronic anesthesia recording (AEAR) system has been launched in Thailand since 2011 but the informative application from stakeholders has never been assessed. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the interpretation capability on the electronic record among non-anesthesia medical personnel and to discover factors affected that capability. Methods: The stratified randomization was done from the personnel related to post-operative care in order to evaluate the interpretation capability for the AEAR system. The 19 items, self-developed questionnaire was approved with Cronbach‘s alpha of 0.84. The test was done at the same time within 25 minutes. The correct answer over 75% was defined as good interpretation capability. Descriptive statistic and logistic regression model were analyzed as if p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: From forty participants, 37 (92.5%) were registrar nurses and the majority was working in Female neurosurgical ward (24.3%). Thirty-six (90%) had a corrective interpretation score over 75%, while there was only 1 (2.5%) had a low score. The corrected answers on the amount of blood and blood products received perioperatively, urine output, drainage and complication in post-anesthetic care unit were the highest vice versa the anesthetic technique which was corrected only in 13 (40%) participants. The interpretation capability was not different between profession, working location and experience, moreover the factors affected were not identified. Conclusions: The electronic record interpretation capability is superior among non-anesthetic medical personnel but cannot identify the factor affected. Suggested further study should be done in the large sample size for maximizing the patient-care-systems’ benefits.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Original articles


1. Kadry B, Feaster WW, Macario A, Ehrenfeld JM. Anesthesia
information management systems: past, present, and future
of anesthesia records. Mount t Sinai J Med 2012;79:154-65.
2. Committee on quality management and departmental
administration. Statement on documentation of anesthesia
care. October 17, 2018. [Internet]. Available at: https://www. Accessed February 21, 2021.
3. Reich DL, Wood Jr RK, Mattar R, et al. Arterial blood pressure
and heart rate discrepancies between handwritten and
computerized anesthesia records. Anesth Analg 2000;91:612-6.
4. Piekarski F, Kaufmann J, Laschat M, Bohmer A, Engelhardt T,
Wappler F. Quality of handover in a pediatric postanesthesia
care unit. Paediatr Anaesth 2015;25:746-52.
5. Randmaa M, Martensson G, Swenne CL, Engstrom M. An
observational study of postoperative handover in anesthetic
clinics; the content of verbal information and factors
influencing receiver memory. J Perianesth Nurs 2015;30:
6. van Schalkwyk JM, Lowes D, Frampton C, Merry AF. Does
manual anaesthetic record capture remove clinically
important data? Br J Anaesth 2011;107:546-52.
7. Ream AK. Historical influences. In: Prakash O, editor.
Computing in anesthesia and intensive care. Boston:
Martinus Nijhoff publishers;1983:p2.
8. Hayrinen K, Saranto K, Nykanen P. Definition, structure,
content, use and impacts of electronic health records:
a review of the research literature. Int J Med Inform 2008;
9. Chen IH, Lin KY, Hu SH, et al. Palliative care for advanced
dementia: knowledge and attitudes of long-term care staff.
J Clin Nurs 2018;27:848-58.
10. Kruse CS, Stein A, Thomas H, Kaur H. The use of electronic
health records to support population health: a systematic
review of the literature. J Med Syst 2018;42:214.
11. Epstein RH, Dexter F, Patel N. Influencing anesthesia
provider behavior using anesthesia information management
system data for near real-time alerts and post hoc reports.
Anesth Analg 2015;121:678-92.
12. Beuscart-Zephir MC, Anceaux F, Crinquette V, Renard JM.
Integrating users’ activity modeling in the design and
assessment of hospital electronic patient records: the
example of anesthesia. Int J Med Inform 2001;64:157-71.
13. Saathoff A. Human factors considerations relevant to CPOE
implementations. J Healthc Inf Manag 2005;19:71-8.
14. Lewis SR, Nicholson A, Smith AF, Alderson P. Physician
anaesthetists versus non-physician providers of anaesthesia
for surgical patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;7:
15. Junghalogon A, Juthasantikul W, Watanayomnaporn E,
Wanasuwanhakul T, Uakritdathikarn T. Nurses’ perceptions
of the benefits from anesthetic record for nursing care for
postoperative patients.Thai J Anesthesiol 2009;35(2):122-30.
16. American association of nurse anesthetists. Documenting
anesthesia care, practice and policy considerations. February
2016. [Internet]. Available at:.
pdf?sfvrsn=ac0049b1_6. Accessed February 21, 2021.
17. Shah NJ, Tremper KK, Kheterpal S. Anatomy of an anesthesia
information management system. Anesthesiol Clin 2011;
18. Szlachta J. Peer instruction of first-year nurse anesthetist
students: a pilot study of a strategy to use limited faculty
resources and promote learning. J Nurs Educ 2013;52:355-9.
19. Nicklaus J, Kusser J, Zessin J, Amaya M. Transforming
education for electronic health record implementation.
J Contin Educ Nurs 2015;46:359-63.
20. Krau SD. The influence of technology in nursing education.
Nurs Clin North Am 2015;50:379-87.
21. Titzer JL, Swenty CF, Mustata Wilson G. Interprofessional
education: lessons learned from conducting an electronic
health record assignment. J Interprof Care 2015;29:536-40.
22. Mill S. Electronic health records and use of clinical decision
support. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am 2019;31:125-31.
23. Westra BL, Delaney CW, Konicek D, Keenan G. Nursing
standards to support the electronic health record. Nurs
Outlook 2008;56:258-66 e1.
24. Mukhopadhyay S, Smith S. Ward-based clinical teaching in
gynaecology: principles and practice. J Obstet Gynaecol