Computer Charting

  1. Our hospital started computer charting about a year ago.The peds icu that I work in is the only icu that is currently "live". While this seems to work well on the med-surg floors and on the general peds floor we feel that in an icu setting with very critical patients it leaves a lot to be desired.Does anyone else out there have any feedback on computer charting in an icu?
  2. Visit SCOOZE profile page

    About SCOOZE

    Joined: Feb '02; Posts: 1


  3. by   P_RN

    This URL is the forum for computer charting.

    Meanwhile my take on it is the people who "designed" our system were not active nurses. It was overly complicated, and there were nowhere near enough terminals for immediate charting to be done.

    I assume that all places don't have this problem. However I still believe that computer charting is more for the insurance companies and the lawyers. IMHO.
  4. by   Teshiee
    I worked in various NICU settings and computer charting is fine unless you have an infant with multiple drips because you must chart every hour on the hour for them. Meditech has a handheld that a nurse can use by the bedside to counteract the problem. I find it redundant because in the end you have to write down information such as weight last med given and so forth when you just had to luxury to look up on the med sheet. I try to roll with with because it seems most hospitals are gearing towards the computer charting.
  5. by   PhantomRN
    We use computer charting in our ICU and it is great.

    We have many computers thru out the unit, most of the computer stations are located just outside of many of the patients rooms. So we can sit and chart and be within 3-4 feet of the pt at all times. For those rooms that dont have a terminal right outside the room, we have computers that roll around in a carrier, so if we have some one precautions one these rolling puters is put IN the room for charting.

    As far as charting Q1 hr on drips we do that as well. Easy. Open up the screen and openup IV meds enter data not hard.

    I also like our system because it goes by body system. It will ask you for normal parameters for each ara, so you are not leaving anything out when we dont chart by exception I wish we did............
  6. by   Teshiee
    It is not a question of it being hard. Just time consuming. You can't chart in the future and making too many entries for back charting is frown upon. That is why I mention the handheld is more pratical when you have a patient with many drips.
  7. by   VickyRN
    We have computer charting in our cardiac intensive care unit (as well as in most inpatient parts of the hospital). It honestly works great--the designers have done a commendable job. The drips are simply flowsheets and not difficult. Sometimes the computers run "slow as molasses" (rare) and sometimes the computers are down (this is when we go back to paper charting and find ourselves really missing the system!!!). We have a computer terminal in each of our pt's rooms, as well as at our desk (with each two pt assignments). Other computers available as well. Work at a smaller hospital parttime in my home town which uses paper charting--find myself missing the computer!!! And my penmanship has really gotten to be doctor-quality illegible!!! Can type MUCH faster than I can write now!!! Speaking of the devil, now that we nurses are computer literate throughout the hospital, the administration NEEDS TO MAKE THE DOCTORS WRITE THEIR ORDERS ON THE COMPUTERS, INSTEAD OF THEIR ILLEGIBLE HANDWRITING IN THE CHARTS!!!! Now this would be an improvement indeed!!! My BIG reservation with computer charting at our hospital is a privacy issue--in that ANY NURSE can look up on the computer ANY PATIENT'S data. I frequently hear nurses from other units inquiring about patients in our intensive care--these nosey nurses oftentimes know more about these patients (haven't been my assignments) than I do, from looking them up on the computer!!!!