Handheld vs. Laptop Computers for Electronic Data Collection in Clinical Research: A Crossover Randomized Trial
- Guy Haller, MD, MSc, PhDa,b,f,
- Dagmar M Haller, MD, PhDd,g,
- Delphine S Courvoisier, MSc, PhDb,
- Christian Lovis, MD, MPHc,e
- aDepartment of Anesthesiology, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- bDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- cDivision of Medical Informatics, Unit of Clinical Informatics, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- dDepartment of Community Medicine and Primary Care, Geneva University Hospitals-University of Geneva Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland
- eUniversity of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- fDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- gDepartment of General Practice, the University of Melbourne, Australia
- Correspondence: Guy Haller, MD, MSc, PhD, Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Anesthesiology, Geneva University Hospitals, 24 Rue Micheli-du-Crest, 1211, Geneva 14-Switzerland (Email: Guy.Haller{at}hcuge.ch).
- Received 20 October 2008
- Accepted 2 June 2009
Abstract
Objective To compare users' speed, number of entry errors and satisfaction in using two current devices for electronic data collection in clinical research: handheld and laptop computers.
Design The authors performed a randomized cross-over trial using 160 different paper-based questionnaires and representing altogether 45,440 variables. Four data coders were instructed to record, according to a random predefined and equally balanced sequence, the content of these questionnaires either on a laptop or on a handheld computer. Instructions on the kind of device to be used were provided to data-coders in individual sealed and opaque envelopes. Study conditions were controlled and the data entry process performed in a quiet environment.
Measurements The authors compared the duration of the data recording process, the number of errors and users' satisfaction with the two devices. The authors divided errors into two separate categories, typing and missing data errors. The original paper-based questionnaire was used as a gold-standard.
Results The overall duration of the recording process was significantly reduced (2.0 versus 3.3 min) when data were recorded on the laptop computer (p < 0.001). Data accuracy also improved. There were 5.8 typing errors per 1,000 entries with the laptop compared to 8.4 per 1,000 with the handheld computer (p < 0.001). The difference was even more important for missing data which decreased from 22.8 to 2.9 per 1,000 entries when a laptop was used (p < 0.001). Users found the laptop easier, faster and more satisfying to use than the handheld computer.
Conclusions Despite the increasing use of handheld computers for electronic data collection in clinical research, these devices should be used with caution. They double the duration of the data entry process and significantly increase the risk of typing errors and missing data. This may become a particularly crucial issue in studies where these devices are provided to patients or healthcare workers, unfamiliar with Computer Technologies, for self-reporting or research data collection processes.
Footnotes
-
The funding required for this project was provided by Geneva University Hospitals. The authors would like to acknowledge the support received for this project. The authors are grateful to Ms Jacqueline Haller, sociologist, who contributed to the assessment of data recording errors. The authors acknowledge the excellent work of the four data coders who participated with enthusiasm in this study: Mr Christopher Chung, Mr Julien Gobeil, Ms Sandra Papillon and Ms Chantal Plomb.
