This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (21)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, A. E.
Right arrow Articles by Christakis, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, A. E.
Right arrow Articles by Christakis, D. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Office Practice
PEDIATRICS Vol. 113 No. 2 February 2004, pp. 238-242

Pediatricians’ Use of and Attitudes About Personal Digital Assistants

Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS*,{ddagger} and Dimitri A. Christakis, MD, MPH§,||

* Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana
{ddagger} Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program
§ Department of Pediatrics
|| Child Health Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

Background. Personal digital assistants (PDAs) are being increasingly used in medical practice. Although they have been touted as having the ability to improve efficiency and safety, little is known about pediatricians’ use of and attitudes about PDAs.

Objective. Our goals were to 1) determine the percentage of pediatricians using PDAs and computers, 2) determine perceived strengths and weaknesses of PDAs, and 3) explore characteristics associated with beliefs and use.

Design/Methods. Pediatricians (2130) were selected randomly from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile of US-licensed physicians. All participants were mailed a survey along with a prepaid return envelope and a $1 incentive. Up to 3 mailings were sent per participant.

Results. Of eligible participants, 63.2% returned a survey. There were no significant differences between respondents and nonrespondents with respect to sex, type of practice, and present employment. Thirty-five percent of respondents currently use PDAs at work, and 40% currently use PDAs for personal use. Of those using PDAs, the most commonly used applications were for drug reference (80%), personal scheduling (67%), and medical calculations (61%). Few pediatricians are currently using PDAs for prescription writing (8%) or billing (4%). Users of PDAs were more likely to be male (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.64–3.19), in an urban community (AOR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.30–2.55), in training (AOR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.58–4.42), not in private practice (AOR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.03–2.11), and a more recent graduate of medical school (AOR: 1.04 per year; 95% CI: 1.02–1.06). When controlling for covariates, those using PDAs were more likely to believe that PDAs can decrease medical errors (AOR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.46–3.38) and increase efficiency (AOR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.56–3.71). When compared with nonusers, users were less likely to view the small screen size (AOR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37–0.77) or system speed (AOR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.26–0.84) as a problem but were significantly more likely to view memory as an issue (AOR: 3.48; 95% CI: 2.30–5.25).

Conclusions. More than one third of pediatricians are using PDAs in clinical practice. There seems to be a general consensus among users that they have the potential to improve patient safety and streamline care. Future studies should explore means to utilize their potential.

Key Words: pediatrician • hand-held • PDA • computer

Abbreviations: PDA, personal digital assistant • AMA, American Medical Association • AOR, adjusted odds ratio • CI, confidence interval

Received for publication Jan 16, 2003; Accepted Jun 23, 2003.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
L. A. Crane, M. F. Daley, J. Barrow, C. Babbel, B. L. Beaty, J. F. Steiner, A. Kempe, L. Miriam Dickinson, and S. Stokley
Sentinel Physician Networks as a Technique for Rapid Immunization Policy Surveys
Eval Health Prof, March 1, 2008; 31(1): 43 - 64.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
F. Yu, T. K. Houston, M. N. Ray, D. Q. Garner, and E. S. Berner
Patterns of Use of Handheld Clinical Decision Support Tools in the Clinical Setting
Med Decis Making, December 1, 2007; 27(6): 744 - 753.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Intensive Care MedHome page
B. G. Fahy and J. T. Ketzler
Implementation of a Handheld Electronic Point-of-Care Billing System Improved Efficiency in the Critical Care Unit
J Intensive Care Med, November 1, 2007; 22(6): 374 - 380.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
M. N. Ray, T. K. Houston, F. B. Yu, N. Menachemi, R. S. Maisiak, J. J. Allison, and E. S. Berner
Development and Testing of a Scale to Assess Physician Attitudes about Handheld Computers with Decision Support
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., September 1, 2006; 13(5): 567 - 572.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Care Res RevHome page
P. A. Fishman, M. C. Hornbrook, R. T. Meenan, and M. J. Goodman
Opportunities and Challenges for Measuring Cost, Quality, and Clinical Effectiveness in Health Care
Med Care Res Rev, September 1, 2004; 61(3_suppl): 124S - 143S.
[Abstract] [PDF]