Search

Self-powered human-interactive but invisible electronics have many applications in anti-theft and anti-fake systems for human society. In this work, for the first time, we demonstrate a transparent paper-based, self-powered, and human-interactive flexible system. The system is based on an electrostatic induction mechanism with no extra power system appended. The self-powered, transparent paper device can be used for a transparent paper-based art anti-theft system in museums or for a smart mapping anti-fake system in precious packaging and documents, by virtue of the advantages of adding/removing freely, having no impairment on the appearance of the protected objects, and being easily mass manufactured. This initial study bridges the transparent nanopaper with a self-powered and human-interactive electronic system, paving the way for the development of smart transparent paper electronics.

Objective To evaluate the ability of an electronic system created at the University of Washington to accurately document prerecorded VF and pulseless electrical activity (PEA) cardiac arrest scenarios compared with the American Heart Association paper cardiac arrest record. Methods 16 anaesthesiology residents were randomly assigned to view one of two prerecorded, simulated VF and PEA scenarios and asked to document the event with either the paper or electronic system. Each subject then repeated the process with the other video and documentation method. Five types of documentation errors were defined: (1) omission, (2) specification, (3) timing, (4) commission and (5) noise. The mean difference in errors between the paper and electronic methods was analysed using a single factor repeated measures ANOVA model. Results Compared with paper records, the electronic system omitted 6.3 fewer events (95% CI −10.1 to −2.5, p=0.003), which represents a 28% reduction in omission errors. Users recorded 2.9 fewer noise items (95% CI −5.3 to −0.6, p=0.003) when compared with paper, representing a 36% decrease in redundant or irrelevant information. The rate of timing (Δ=−3.2, 95% CI −9.3 to 3.0, p=0.286) and commission (Δ=−4.4, 95% CI −9.4 to 0.5, p=0.075) errors were similar between the electronic system and paper, while the rate of specification errors were about a third lower for the electronic system when compared with the paper record (Δ=−3.2, 95% CI −6.3 to −0.2, p=0.037). Conclusions Compared with paper documentation, documentation with the electronic system captured 24% more critical information during a simulated medical emergency without loss in data quality.

Purpose To describe nursing assessment documentation practices in aged care organizations and to evaluate the quality of electronic versus paper-based documentation of nursing assessment. Methods This was a retrospective nursing documentation audit study. Study samples were 2299 paper-based and 6997 electronic resident assessment forms contained in 159 paper-based and 249 electronic resident nursing records, respectively, from three aged care organizations. The practice of nursing assessment documentation in participating aged care homes was described. Three attributes of quality of nursing assessment documentation were evaluated: format and structure, process, and content by seven measures: quantity, completeness, timeliness comprehensiveness, frequencies of documentation specific to care domains and data items, and whether assessment forms were signed and dated. Results Varying practice in documentation of nursing assessment was found among different aged care organizations and homes. Electronic resident records contained higher numbers and more comprehensive resident assessment forms than paper-based records. The frequency of documentation was higher in electronic than in paper-based records in relation to most care domains. There was no difference between the two types of documentation systems on other aspects of nursing assessment documentation (overall completeness and timeliness, variation of frequencies among different care domains, and item completion in personal hygiene assessment forms). Conclusions Electronic nursing documentation systems could improve the quality of documentation structure and format, process and content in the aspects of quantity, comprehensiveness and signing and dating of assessment forms. Further studies are needed to understand the factors leading to the variations of practice and the limitations of nursing assessment documentation and to evaluate documentation quality from a clinical perspective.