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.
Studieoversikt
Detaljert beskrivelse
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.
Studietype
Registrering (Forventet)
Fase
- Ikke aktuelt
Kontakter og plasseringer
Studiesteder
-
-
-
St. Gallen, Sveits, CH-9000
- University of St. Gallen, Institute of Information Managemen
-
Zurich, Sveits, CH-8091
- University Hospital Zurich, Department of Surgery
-
-
Deltakelseskriterier
Kvalifikasjonskriterier
Alder som er kvalifisert for studier
Tar imot friske frivillige
Kjønn som er kvalifisert for studier
Beskrivelse
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
Studieplan
Hvordan er studiet utformet?
Designdetaljer
- Primært formål: Helsetjenesteforskning
- Tildeling: Randomisert
- Intervensjonsmodell: Enkeltgruppeoppdrag
- Masking: Ingen (Open Label)
Våpen og intervensjoner
Deltakergruppe / Arm |
Intervensjon / Behandling |
|---|---|
|
Aktiv komparator: 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
Andre navn:
|
|
Eksperimentell: 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
Andre navn:
|
Hva måler studien?
Primære resultatmål
Resultatmål |
Tiltaksbeskrivelse |
Tidsramme |
|---|---|---|
|
Evaluation score
Tidsramme: 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
|
Sekundære resultatmål
Resultatmål |
Tiltaksbeskrivelse |
Tidsramme |
|---|---|---|
|
Recruitment rate
Tidsramme: 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
Tidsramme: 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
Tidsramme: 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
Tidsramme: 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
|
Samarbeidspartnere og etterforskere
Sponsor
Etterforskere
- Hovedetterforsker: Dimitri A Raptis, MD, MSc, University Hospital Zurich, Department of Surgery
- Hovedetterforsker: Rolf Graf, PhD, University Hospital Zurich, Department of Surgical Research
Publikasjoner og nyttige lenker
Generelle publikasjoner
- 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.
Studierekorddatoer
Studer hoveddatoer
Studiestart
Primær fullføring (Forventet)
Studiet fullført (Forventet)
Datoer for studieregistrering
Først innsendt
Først innsendt som oppfylte QC-kriteriene
Først lagt ut (Anslag)
Oppdateringer av studieposter
Sist oppdatering lagt ut (Anslag)
Siste oppdatering sendt inn som oppfylte QC-kriteriene
Sist bekreftet
Mer informasjon
Begreper knyttet til denne studien
Andre studie-ID-numre
- PSP_Appendix_2
Denne informasjonen ble hentet direkte fra nettstedet clinicaltrials.gov uten noen endringer. Hvis du har noen forespørsler om å endre, fjerne eller oppdatere studiedetaljene dine, vennligst kontakt register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en endring er implementert på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også bli oppdatert automatisk på nettstedet vårt. .
Kliniske studier på Evaluation form
-
Assistance Publique Hopitaux De MarseilleUkjentLivskvalitet | Perifer ansiktslammelseFrankrike
-
Instituto de Neurologia y Neurocirugia Hospital...FullførtParkinsons sykdomMexico
-
MedtronicNeuroFullførtOveraktiv blære | Urgency-frekvens syndrom | Urinurge-inkontinensForente stater, Nederland, Canada, Storbritannia
-
Jewish General HospitalAktiv, ikke rekrutterendeEldre mennesker | Helsevesen | Helsesvikt | EvalueringerCanada
-
Chinese University of Hong KongFullført
-
The University of Texas Health Science Center,...Texas Woman's UniversityFullførtTraumatisk hjerneskade | Ervervet hjerneskade | Tilfeldig fallForente stater
-
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories LimitedUkjent
-
German Cancer Research CenterUniversity of Music, Drama, and Media HannoverHar ikke rekruttert ennå
-
SanofiFullførtFriske Frivillige | Autoimmun lidelseForente stater
-
AstraZenecaParexelFullført