Smartphone use for Paediatric Calculations in Emergencies (SPaCE)

• Published in: Archives of disease in childhood 2024-04, Vol.109 (4), p.282-286
• Main Authors: Evans, Jordan, Morrison, Zoe, Thomas-Turner, Rhian, Bouamra, Omar, Mullen, Stephen, Morgan, Jeff
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age; Arithmetic; Charts; Computation; Departments; Drug dosages; Emergency Care; Emergency medical care; Females; Glucose; Health care; Hospitals; Likert scale; Likert Scales; Lorazepam; Males; Medical personnel; Mental Computation; Methods; Nurses; Paediatric Emergency Medicine; Pediatrics; Physicians; Resuscitation; Sex; Simulated Environment; Smartphones; Statistical analysis; Stress; Technology; Variance analysis
• ISSN: 0003-9888; 1468-2044
• DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2023-326180

BackgroundThe preparation for critically ill children involves calculating drug and fluid volumes using the commonly taught WETFLAG (weight, energy, endotracheal tube, fluids, lorazepam, adrenaline, glucose) acronym. While smartphone applications (apps) are increasingly used for these calculations in clinical practice, limited studies have explored their accuracy and safety.AimTo assess the accuracy of three calculation methods for paediatric emergency drug doses and fluid volumes: a smartphone app, reference charts and traditional calculation methods. The secondary aims were to investigate the effect on the time taken and self-reported stress levels.MethodsA convenience sample of healthcare professionals from four hospitals contributed. Participants calculated drug and fluid doses for fictional patients using the three different methods. The method and case order were randomised centrally. The study recorded the number of errors made during the calculations, healthcare professionals’ self-reported stress levels on a scale of 0 (no stress) to 10 (maximum stress) and the time taken for each case. The app was developed at the direct request of the study team.ResultsNinety-six participants calculated values for six fictional cases, resulting in 576 calculations. Traditional calculation methods showed a statistically significant higher rate of error compared with the use of a smartphone app or reference charts (mean=1, 0, 0, respectively). The smartphone app outperformed both traditional calculation methods and reference charts for time taken and user-reported stress levels.ConclusionsTraditional methods of ‘WETFLAG’ drug and fluid calculations are associated with a statistically significant increased risk of error compared with the use of reference charts or smartphone app. The smartphone app proved significantly faster and less stressful to use compared with traditional calculation methods or reference charts.