IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dual vs. Single Monitor in a Canadian Hospital Archiving Department: A study of Efficiency and Satisfaction


  • Thomas Poder

    () (UETMIS – CHU of Sherbrooke and GREDI, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada)

  • Sylvie GODBOUT

    (UETMIS – CHU of Sherbrooke)

  • Christian BELLEMARE

    (UETMIS – CHU of Sherbrooke)


This was a prospective study that compared, for each archivist, the time required to process records depending on whether a single or a dual monitor was used. We collected data for each archivist during her use of the single monitor for 40 hours and during her use of the dual monitor for 20 hours. During the experimental periods, archivists did not perform other related duties, so we were able to measure the real-time processing of records. To control for the type of records and their impact on the process time required, we categorized the major and minor cases based on whether acute care or day surgery was involved. Overall results show that 1,234 records were processed using a single monitor and 647 records using a dual monitor. The time required to process a record was significantly higher (p-value = 0.071) with a single monitor compared to a dual monitor (19.83 vs. 18.73 minutes). However, the percentage of major cases was significantly higher (p-value = 0.000) in the single monitor group compared to the dual monitor group (78 vs. 69 percent). As a consequence, we needed to adjust our results, which reduced the difference in time required to process a record between the two systems from 1.1 to 0.61 minutes. Thus, the net real-time difference was only 37 seconds in favor of the dual monitor system. This represented a time savings of 3.1% and generated a net cost savings of 7896 Canadian dollars for each workstation that devoted 35 hours per week to the processing of records, over an amortization period of five years. Finally, satisfaction questionnaires responses indicated a high level of satisfaction and support for the dual-monitor system.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Poder & Sylvie GODBOUT & Christian BELLEMARE, 2010. "Dual vs. Single Monitor in a Canadian Hospital Archiving Department: A study of Efficiency and Satisfaction," Cahiers de recherche 10-07, Departement d'Economique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
  • Handle: RePEc:shr:wpaper:10-07

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2010
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    Dual monitor; archiving department; efficiency;


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:shr:wpaper:10-07. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Luc Savard). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.