Background Advancements in clinical medicine depend on state-of-the-art healthcare analytics, which require patient data from electronic health record (EHR) systems and electronic data capture (EDC). We developed and implemented an independent, yet integrated EDC system (designated IMI-EDC) in a tertiary hospital. This system ensures that clinical data are available for patient care and research while complying with regulatory standards. In this study, we compared the first cohort of IMI-EDC users against those using the predecessor paper-mediated system, measuring patient comfort and satisfaction, data quality, and facilitation of workflow facilitation. Methods Until July 2025, more than 5000 patients were able to submit their medical history and health-related quality of life questionnaires via the IMI-EDC. All patients using tablets were surveyed regarding their user experience. Additionally, a subset of 100 EDC submissions was compared to 100 submissions via the paper-based system with respect to data completeness, correctness, clarity, and readability. Finally, the time to transfer data to the Heidelberg Pancreas Registry (HPR) research database was measured. Results IMI-EDC was successfully implemented at our center. Approximately three-quarters (75%) of patients using tablets were comfortable with the system. Tablet users were significantly more likely to submit completed documents than those using paper (98/100 vs. 66/100), and among submitted forms, fully completed questionnaires were more frequent in the tablet group (70/98 vs. 24/66). Data transfers to the HPR were quicker for tablet submissions than for paper submissions in a small pragmatic subsample (4.2 minutes vs. 9.9 minutes; 7 tablet vs. 7 paper cases). Conclusions IMI-EDC is satisfactory for patients and staff in terms of user experience, data completeness, and workload reduction in the setting of a high-volume surgical center.
Blumenstock et al. (2026) studied this question.