smartSTAT
    Request a demo

    Evidence

    Updated October 2026

    In a 2026 randomized crossover study at MIT’s Center for Clinical and Translational Research, 25 clinicians compared manual cart checks with smartSTAT. The researchers have no ties to the company. The manuscript is under peer review and will be linked here upon publication.

    Participants who caught every expired or missing item

    8 of 2532%

    Manual

    25 of 25100%

    smartSTAT

    By hand, 17 of 25 experienced clinicians missed at least one expired or missing item. With smartSTAT, none did.

    Time on core cart-check tasks (manual = 100)

    ManualsmartSTAT
    Time on core cart-check tasks (manual = 100)Nurses: manual 100, smartSTAT 19, 81% less. Pharmacists: manual 100, smartSTAT 13, 87% less. Technicians: manual 100, smartSTAT 8, 92% less. Bars share a zero baseline and a maximum of 100.

    System Usability Scale

    System Usability Scale

    smartSTAT scored 86 on the System Usability Scale. The industry average is 68 and scores above 80 are considered excellent.

    What this means on the floor

    For a cart with 200+ items, a 30-minute manual check is projected to take under a minute with smartSTAT. Every participant was faster, and backup-cart alerts arrived 59 percent sooner.

    Why it matters

    • Crash cart readiness has been a top-five Joint Commission survey finding since 2022.
    • Each minute of delay to epinephrine in in-hospital cardiac arrest lowers the odds of survival (Donnino et al., BMJ 2014, 25,095 patients).

    • Hospitals spend about 133 staff hours per cart per year on manual checks.

      smartSTAT time study at a tertiary care hospital.

    Return on investment

    Time-based cost accounting at a tertiary care hospital estimates over 300% ROI in three years and payback within one year, factoring in labor, expired inventory, adverse-event risk, retention and compliance.

    Request the ROI workbook