Comparison of precision of a paperless electronic input method versus the conventional paper form in an andrology laboratory: a prospective study.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ANDROLOGY Basic and Clinical Andrology Pub Date : 2025-01-13 DOI:10.1186/s12610-024-00248-9
Kevin K W Lam, Percy C K Tsang, Connie C Y Chan, Evans P K Ng, Tak-Ming Cheung, Raymond H W Li, Ernest H Y Ng, William S B Yeung
{"title":"Comparison of precision of a paperless electronic input method versus the conventional paper form in an andrology laboratory: a prospective study.","authors":"Kevin K W Lam, Percy C K Tsang, Connie C Y Chan, Evans P K Ng, Tak-Ming Cheung, Raymond H W Li, Ernest H Y Ng, William S B Yeung","doi":"10.1186/s12610-024-00248-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Manual counting for semen analysis is recommended by the World Health Organization. Technicians performing this usually record their results on a paper worksheet and then enter the data into an electronic laboratory information system. One disadvantage of this approach is the chance of post-analytical transcription errors, which can be reduced by checking the computer entries before reporting by another technician. Such practice inevitably increases the running cost and delays the reporting time. The present study was to establish a paperless electronic data entry system for semen analysis and compare its precision with the conventional paper method. During semen analysis, readings on the cell counter were video recorded. The precision of the paper record entries was determined by comparing them with the corresponding video records. Patient characteristics and semen analysis results were input directly into an in-house developed data entry system via a tablet computer immediately after analysis. The same set of data was also handwritten on a paper form and was subsequently input into a standard computerized database according to routine practice. The agreement of the data entries between the two systems was then compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 787 semen analyses were included in the study, involving 201 samples in Phase I and 586 samples in Phase II of the study. Phase I was the initial learning period. The overall rate of transcription error of the paper form was 0.07%, whereas that of the paperless system was 0.17%. In phase II, the paperless system was modified according to users' comments. The transcription error rate of the paper form was 0.05%, while that of the paperless system was substantially reduced to 0.01% (p = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The paperless system is a reliable tool for recording data from semen analysis compared with the conventional paper form. However, training is needed to reduce the error rate of the paperless system.</p>","PeriodicalId":8730,"journal":{"name":"Basic and Clinical Andrology","volume":"35 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11727433/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basic and Clinical Andrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12610-024-00248-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANDROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Manual counting for semen analysis is recommended by the World Health Organization. Technicians performing this usually record their results on a paper worksheet and then enter the data into an electronic laboratory information system. One disadvantage of this approach is the chance of post-analytical transcription errors, which can be reduced by checking the computer entries before reporting by another technician. Such practice inevitably increases the running cost and delays the reporting time. The present study was to establish a paperless electronic data entry system for semen analysis and compare its precision with the conventional paper method. During semen analysis, readings on the cell counter were video recorded. The precision of the paper record entries was determined by comparing them with the corresponding video records. Patient characteristics and semen analysis results were input directly into an in-house developed data entry system via a tablet computer immediately after analysis. The same set of data was also handwritten on a paper form and was subsequently input into a standard computerized database according to routine practice. The agreement of the data entries between the two systems was then compared.

Results: A total of 787 semen analyses were included in the study, involving 201 samples in Phase I and 586 samples in Phase II of the study. Phase I was the initial learning period. The overall rate of transcription error of the paper form was 0.07%, whereas that of the paperless system was 0.17%. In phase II, the paperless system was modified according to users' comments. The transcription error rate of the paper form was 0.05%, while that of the paperless system was substantially reduced to 0.01% (p = 0.008).

Conclusion: The paperless system is a reliable tool for recording data from semen analysis compared with the conventional paper form. However, training is needed to reduce the error rate of the paperless system.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
男科实验室中无纸化电子输入法与传统纸质形式的精度比较:一项前瞻性研究。
背景:手工计数精液分析是世界卫生组织推荐的。执行此操作的技术人员通常将其结果记录在纸质工作表上,然后将数据输入电子实验室信息系统。这种方法的一个缺点是分析后转录错误的机会,这可以通过在另一名技术人员报告之前检查计算机条目来减少。这种做法不可避免地增加了运行成本,延误了报告时间。本研究旨在建立精液分析的无纸化电子数据录入系统,并与传统纸质录入系统的精密度进行比较。在精液分析过程中,细胞计数器上的读数被录像。通过与相应的视频记录进行比较,确定了纸质记录条目的精度。患者特征和精液分析结果在分析后立即通过平板电脑直接输入内部开发的数据输入系统。同样的一组数据也手写在一张纸上,然后按照惯例输入标准的计算机化数据库。然后比较了两个系统之间数据条目的一致性。结果:本研究共纳入787例精液分析,其中一期201例,二期586例。第一阶段是最初的学习阶段。纸质表格的誊写错误率为0.07%,而无纸化系统的誊写错误率为0.17%。在第二阶段,根据用户的意见对无纸化系统进行了修改。纸质表格的誊写错误率为0.05%,而无纸化系统的誊写错误率大幅降低至0.01% (p = 0.008)。结论:与传统的纸质记录系统相比,无纸化系统是一种可靠的精液分析记录工具。但是,为了降低无纸化系统的错误率,需要进行培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Basic and Clinical Andrology
Basic and Clinical Andrology Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: Basic and Clinical Andrology is an open access journal in the domain of andrology covering all aspects of male reproductive and sexual health in both human and animal models. The journal aims to bring to light the various clinical advancements and research developments in andrology from the international community.
期刊最新文献
Biological and therapeutic implications of sex hormone-related gene clustering in testicular cancer. Preoperative semen quality is superior to the quality shortly after orchiectomy in patients with testicular germ cell tumour - a retrospective study from two centres in Germany. Clinical forms of 5 cases of circumcised penile cancer in immunocompetent subjects in Abidjan (Ivory Coast). Challenging cases of adherent periarterial vein during subinguinal Fisch technique and subinguinal micro-varicocelecotmy and sclerotherapy: a prospective comparative study. Future perspectives for PDE5 inhibitors bridging the gap between cardiovascular health and psychological status.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1