Statistical methods
Survey responses were analyzed in the statistical software SPSS version 27 (IBM Corp., 2021 Armonk, NY). Planned comparisons were conducted between the control group and any intervention group (contrast 1) and between the partial and full intervention groups, which additionally used the digital nursing documentation (contrast 2). Thus, contrasts 1 and 2 tested for any effect of the intervention and whether the full intervention was additionally beneficial, respectively.Metric baseline characteristics were expressed as mean values with standard deviations. Categorical baseline characteristics were presented as frequencies (n, %). Unadjusted outcome scores were reported as mean values with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) (see Treatment effects at two follow-up periods were planned to be tested using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). However, in accordance with a prespecified approach, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to correct for the baseline imbalance detected. The respective baseline variable was used as the covariate. As an additional explorative analysis, we ran the ANCOVA with “nested data” as a second covariate. All descriptive statistical values and corresponding numbers of subjects (n) were reported with mentioning of losses to follow-ups. Effect sizes were calculated and reported accordingly (per protocol). Additionally, overall hypotheses of the Alpha was set at 0.05, and exact 