Desktop Versus Mobile Data Collection in Clinical Trial
Desktop vs. Mobile Data Collection in a Prospective Multicenter Clinical Trial
Paper-based data collection for prospective clinical trials is associated with a poor quality of data collection. This typically involves missing or wrong data entry or a low recruitment rate, mainly due to the cumbersome and uncontrolled data collection.
Electronic data collection is associated with improved quality of data entry in the cases of Electronic Patient Records (EPR) and patient handover among doctors during night and day shifts. However, a comprehensive direct comparison between web-based desktop personal computer (PC) and mobile (e.g. iPad) data collection has not yet been reported.
The purpose of this prospective trial is to compare the users' experience with the web-based desktop PC and mobile data collection (iPad) tools.
Descripción general del estudio
Estado
Condiciones
Intervención / Tratamiento
Descripción detallada
The investigators designed a prospective randomized controlled trial where doctors from several randomly selected hospitals will use either a desktop PC or mobile (iPad) data collection tool. A validated user experience evaluation instrument will be used at the beginning, during interim analysis and at the end of the trial.
The desktop-based data collection is built on Drupal, a renowned open source content management system (CMS). The same CMS will be used with a special interface designed for iOS/iPad. Both data collection platforms will be used in parallel to a prospective clinical trial.
Tipo de estudio
Inscripción (Anticipado)
Fase
- No aplica
Contactos y Ubicaciones
Ubicaciones de estudio
-
-
-
St. Gallen, Suiza, CH-9000
- University of St. Gallen, Institute of Information Managemen
-
Zurich, Suiza, CH-8091
- University Hospital Zurich, Department of Surgery
-
-
Criterios de participación
Criterio de elegibilidad
Edades elegibles para estudiar
Acepta Voluntarios Saludables
Géneros elegibles para el estudio
Descripción
Inclusion Criteria:
- Emergency Room doctors
- Surgeons
- Agree to participate in the trial
- Provide informed consent
- Have basic information technology literacy
- Agree to receive brief training of the platform
Exclusion Criteria:
- Clinicians and health care professionals not part of this trial
- Lacking of basic information technology literacy
Plan de estudios
¿Cómo está diseñado el estudio?
Detalles de diseño
- Propósito principal: Investigación de servicios de salud
- Asignación: Aleatorizado
- Modelo Intervencionista: Asignación de un solo grupo
- Enmascaramiento: Ninguno (etiqueta abierta)
Armas e Intervenciones
Grupo de participantes/brazo |
Intervención / Tratamiento |
|---|---|
|
Comparador activo: Desktop PC
Conventional institutional Desktop Personal Computers will be used to collect data of patients via a password protected encrypted interface.
|
A validated user experience evaluation questionnaire will be completed by each participant in the beginning, at the interim period, and at the end of the trial
Otros nombres:
|
|
Experimental: Mobile
Novel Mobile Clinical Trial Management System on iPads will be used to collect data of patients via a password protected encrypted interface.
|
A validated user experience evaluation questionnaire will be completed by each participant in the beginning, at the interim period, and at the end of the trial
Otros nombres:
|
¿Qué mide el estudio?
Medidas de resultado primarias
Medida de resultado |
Medida Descripción |
Periodo de tiempo |
|---|---|---|
|
Evaluation score
Periodo de tiempo: 2 years
|
A validated user experience and evaluation instrument will be used. The overall score will be compared between the Desktop PC and Mobile (iPad) data collection tools. PC: indicates Personal Computer |
2 years
|
Medidas de resultado secundarias
Medida de resultado |
Medida Descripción |
Periodo de tiempo |
|---|---|---|
|
Recruitment rate
Periodo de tiempo: 2 years
|
The recruitment rate is defined as the proportion of patients recruited divided by the total number of patients recruited + patients missed: (rate=recruited/(recruited+missed). The recruitment rates will be compared between the Desktop PC and Mobile (iPad) data collection tools. PC: indicates Personal Computer |
2 years
|
|
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Periodo de tiempo: 2 years
|
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a form of economic analysis that compares the relative costs and outcomes (effects) of two or more courses of action. CEA assigns a monetary value to the measure of effect. Typically the CEA is expressed in terms of a ratio where the denominator is a gain from a measure and the numerator is the cost associated with this gain. In this study, CEA will be calculated as: (ratio=costs/evaluation score) and (ratio=costs/recruitment rate). |
2 years
|
|
Cost-benefit analysis
Periodo de tiempo: 2 years
|
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a systematic process for calculating and comparing benefits and costs of a project for two purposes; in order to determine if it is a sound investment (justification/feasibility), and to see how it compares with alternate projects (ranking/priority assignment).
It involves comparing the total expected cost of each option against the total expected benefits, to see whether the benefits outweigh the costs, and by how much.
In CBA, benefits and costs are expressed in money terms, and are adjusted for the "time value of money".
|
2 years
|
|
Cost-utility analysis
Periodo de tiempo: 2 years
|
Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is a form of financial analysis used to guide procurement decisions.
The most common and well-known application of this analysis is in health technology assessment.
Cost is measured in monetary units.
|
2 years
|
Colaboradores e Investigadores
Patrocinador
Investigadores
- Investigador principal: Dimitri A Raptis, MD, MSc, University Hospital Zurich, Department of Surgery
- Investigador principal: Rolf Graf, PhD, University Hospital Zurich, Department of Surgical Research
Publicaciones y enlaces útiles
Publicaciones Generales
- Raptis DA, Mettler T, Tzanas K, Graf R. A novel open-source web-based platform promoting collaboration of healthcare professionals and biostatisticians: a design science approach. Inform Health Soc Care. 2012 Jan;37(1):22-36. doi: 10.3109/17538157.2011.590257. Epub 2011 Oct 19.
- Raptis DA, Fernandes C, Chua W, Boulos PB. Electronic software significantly improves quality of handover in a London teaching hospital. Health Informatics J. 2009 Sep;15(3):191-8. doi: 10.1177/1460458209337431.
- Mirani R, Lederer A. An Instrument for Assessing the Organizational Benefits of IS projects. Decision Sciences, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1998, 803-838.
Fechas de registro del estudio
Fechas importantes del estudio
Inicio del estudio
Finalización primaria (Anticipado)
Finalización del estudio (Anticipado)
Fechas de registro del estudio
Enviado por primera vez
Primero enviado que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad
Publicado por primera vez (Estimar)
Actualizaciones de registros de estudio
Última actualización publicada (Estimar)
Última actualización enviada que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad
Última verificación
Más información
Términos relacionados con este estudio
Palabras clave
Otros números de identificación del estudio
- PSP_Appendix_2
Esta información se obtuvo directamente del sitio web clinicaltrials.gov sin cambios. Si tiene alguna solicitud para cambiar, eliminar o actualizar los detalles de su estudio, comuníquese con register@clinicaltrials.gov. Tan pronto como se implemente un cambio en clinicaltrials.gov, también se actualizará automáticamente en nuestro sitio web. .