A survey of user acceptance of electronic patient anesthesia records

Background: An anesthesia information management system (AIMS), although not widely used in Korea, will eventually replace handwritten records. This hospital began using AIMS in April 2010. The purpose of this study was to evaluate users' attitudes concerning AIMS and to compare them with manual documentation in the operating room (OR). Methods: A structured questionnaire focused on satisfaction with electronic anesthetic records and comparison with handwritten anesthesia records was administered to anesthesiologists, trainees, and nurses during February 2011 and the responses were collected anonymously during March 2011. Results: A total of 28 anesthesiologists, 27 trainees, and 47 nurses responded to this survey. Most participants involved in this survey were satisfied with AIMS (96.3%, 82.2%, and 89.3% of trainees, anesthesiologists, and nurses, respectively) and preferred AIMS over handwritten anesthesia records in 96.3%, 71.4%, and 97.9% of trainees, anesthesiologists, and nurses, respectively. However, there were also criticisms of AIMS related to user-discomfort during short, simple or emergency surgeries, doubtful legal status, and inconvenient placement of the system. Conclusions: Overall, most of the anesthetic practitioners in this hospital quickly accepted and prefer AIMS over the handwritten anesthetic records in the OR.