Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry Usability in the Reduction of Prescribing Errors

Some hospitals have implemented computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems to reduce the medical error rates. However, research in this area has been very limited, especially regarding the impact of CPOE use on the reduction of prescribing errors. Moreover, the past studies have dealt with the overall impact of CPOE on the reduction of broadly termed "medical errors", and they have not specified which medical errors have been reduced by CPOE. Furthermore, the majority of the past research in this field has been either qualitative or has not used robust empirical techniques. This research examined the impacts of usability of CPOE systems on the reduction of doctors' prescribing errors. Methods: One hundred and sixty-six questionnaires were used for quantitative data analyses. Since the data was not normally distributed, partial least square path modelling-as the second generation of multivariate data analyses-was applied to analyze data. Results: It was found that the ease of use of the system and information quality can significantly reduce prescribing errors. Moreover, the user interface consistency and system error prevention have a significant positive impact on the perceived ease of use. More than 50% of the respondents believed that CPOE reduces the likelihood of drug allergy, drug interaction, and drug dosing errors thus improving patient safety. Conclusions: Prescribing errors in terms of drug allergy, drug interaction, and drug dosing errors are reduced if the CPOE is not error-prone and easy to use, if the user interface is consistent, and if it provides quality information to doctors

Improving Computerized Provider Order Entry Usage in a Community Hospital

The healthcare industry is now faced with the balance between instituting computerized technology and providing safe, high quality, efficient, and lower cost patient care. An important aspect of computer technology is the direct entry of orders electronically by providers into the electronic health record, termed computerized provider order entry (CPOE). This translational research project begins by defining CPOE and discussing CPOE’s effect on patient safety and quality of care by reducing preventable medical errors and adverse drug events and CPOE’s effect on healthcare costs. Regulatory requirements pertaining to CPOE are discussed; providers are expected to be proficient in CPOE in order to meet these requirements. A literature review of barriers to CPOE usage, interventions to implement and improve usage of CPOE, and trends in CPOE usage is conducted and discussed. The purpose of this quality improvement project was to improve CPOE medication order usage among providers within a community hospital by utilizing the provider order entry user satisfaction and usage survey (POEUSUS) to identify barriers to the utilization of CPOE and by employing the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the provision of a CPOE facilitator on the patient care units for twelve hours per week for eight weeks. At the conclusion of the eight-week intervention, the CPOE utilization rates were determined and followed over an eight week interval and were compared to pre-intervention rates. Additionally, providers’ rated their satisfaction of the CPOE facilitator by completing a facilitator survey after each assistance session. The results of this project demonstrated an increase in CPOE medication order usage, from 45.4% CPOE medication order usage during the eight-week pre-intervention period to 55.6% CPOE medication order usage during the eight-week post-intervention period. A statistically significant improvement in provider CPOE satisfaction occurred after the intervention, and providers expressed high degrees of satisfaction with the real-time assistance of the CPOE facilitator. Aspects of CPOE admired by providers and recommendations of providers to changes in CPOE were determined. Finally, age was inversely related and previous computer experiment was positively related to CPOE medication order usage pre-intervention, meaning that younger providers and providers with more computer experience used CPOE more often

Comparison of a prototype for indications-based prescribing with 2 commercial prescribing systems

Importance: The indication (reason for use) for a medication is rarely included on prescriptions despite repeated recommendations to do so. One barrier has been the way existing electronic prescribing systems have been designed. Objective: To evaluate, in comparison with the prescribing modules of 2 leading electronic health record prescribing systems, the efficiency, error rate, and satisfaction with a new computerized provider order entry prototype for the outpatient setting that allows clinicians to initiate prescribing using the indication. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study used usability tests requiring internal medicine physicians, residents, and physician assistants to enter prescriptions electronically, including indication, for 8 clinical scenarios. The tool order assignments were randomized and prescribers were asked to use the prototype for 4 of the scenarios and their usual system for the other 4. Time on task, number of clicks, and order details were captured. User satisfaction was measured using posttask ratings and a validated system usability scale. The study participants practiced in 2 health systems\u27 outpatient practices. Usability tests were conducted between April and October of 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Usability (efficiency, error rate, and satisfaction) of indications-based computerized provider order entry prototype vs the electronic prescribing interface of 2 electronic health record vendors. Results: Thirty-two participants (17 attending physicians, 13 residents, and 2 physician assistants) used the prototype to complete 256 usability test scenarios. The mean (SD) time on task was 1.78 (1.17) minutes. For the 20 participants who used vendor 1\u27s system, it took a mean (SD) of 3.37 (1.90) minutes to complete a prescription, and for the 12 participants using vendor 2\u27s system, it took a mean (SD) of 2.93 (1.52) minutes. Across all scenarios, when comparing number of clicks, for those participants using the prototype and vendor 1, there was a statistically significant difference from the mean (SD) number of clicks needed (18.39 [12.62] vs 46.50 [27.29]; difference, 28.11; 95% CI, 21.47-34.75; P \u3c .001). For those using the prototype and vendor 2, there was also a statistically significant difference in number of clicks (20.10 [11.52] vs 38.25 [19.77]; difference, 18.14; 95% CI, 11.59-24.70; P \u3c .001). A blinded review of the order details revealed medication errors (eg, drug-allergy interactions) in 38 of 128 prescribing sessions using a vendor system vs 7 of 128 with the prototype. Conclusions and Relevance: Reengineering prescribing to start with the drug indication allowed indications to be captured in an easy and useful way, which may be associated with saved time and effort, reduced medication errors, and increased clinician satisfaction

Comparison of a prototype for indications-based prescribing with 2 commercial prescribing systems

Importance: The indication (reason for use) for a medication is rarely included on prescriptions despite repeated recommendations to do so. One barrier has been the way existing electronic prescribing systems have been designed. Objective: To evaluate, in comparison with the prescribing modules of 2 leading electronic health record prescribing systems, the efficiency, error rate, and satisfaction with a new computerized provider order entry prototype for the outpatient setting that allows clinicians to initiate prescribing using the indication. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study used usability tests requiring internal medicine physicians, residents, and physician assistants to enter prescriptions electronically, including indication, for 8 clinical scenarios. The tool order assignments were randomized and prescribers were asked to use the prototype for 4 of the scenarios and their usual system for the other 4. Time on task, number of clicks, and order details were captured. User satisfaction was measured using posttask ratings and a validated system usability scale. The study participants practiced in 2 health systems\u27 outpatient practices. Usability tests were conducted between April and October of 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Usability (efficiency, error rate, and satisfaction) of indications-based computerized provider order entry prototype vs the electronic prescribing interface of 2 electronic health record vendors. Results: Thirty-two participants (17 attending physicians, 13 residents, and 2 physician assistants) used the prototype to complete 256 usability test scenarios. The mean (SD) time on task was 1.78 (1.17) minutes. For the 20 participants who used vendor 1\u27s system, it took a mean (SD) of 3.37 (1.90) minutes to complete a prescription, and for the 12 participants using vendor 2\u27s system, it took a mean (SD) of 2.93 (1.52) minutes. Across all scenarios, when comparing number of clicks, for those participants using the prototype and vendor 1, there was a statistically significant difference from the mean (SD) number of clicks needed (18.39 [12.62] vs 46.50 [27.29]; difference, 28.11; 95% CI, 21.47-34.75; P \u3c .001). For those using the prototype and vendor 2, there was also a statistically significant difference in number of clicks (20.10 [11.52] vs 38.25 [19.77]; difference, 18.14; 95% CI, 11.59-24.70; P \u3c .001). A blinded review of the order details revealed medication errors (eg, drug-allergy interactions) in 38 of 128 prescribing sessions using a vendor system vs 7 of 128 with the prototype. Conclusions and Relevance: Reengineering prescribing to start with the drug indication allowed indications to be captured in an easy and useful way, which may be associated with saved time and effort, reduced medication errors, and increased clinician satisfaction

Refining Computerized Physician Order Entry Initiatives in an Adult Intensive Care Unit

Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) is used in healthcare organizations to improve workflow processes and transcription, as well as to prevent prescribing errors. Previous research has indicated challenges associated with CPOE for end-users that predispose patients to unsafe practices. Unsafe CPOE practices can be detrimental within the intensive care unit (ICU) setting due to the complexity of nursing care. Consequently, end-user satisfaction and understanding of CPOE and electronic health record (EHR) functionality are vital to avoid error omissions. CPOE initiatives should be refined post system implementation to improve clinical workflow, medication processes, and end-user satisfaction. The purpose of this quality improvement project was to refine CPOE system initiatives and develop an e-learning educational module to facilitate end-user understanding of and satisfaction with CPOE. The Iowa model of evidence-based practice, Lean methodology, and Provider Order Entry User Satisfaction and Usage Survey (POESUS) were used to guide the study. An e-learning module was implemented to increase staff understanding of the newly implemented CPOE system, and a plan was provided for ongoing data collection and investigation of end-user satisfaction and medication inadequacies with the CPOE system. A mixed-method design was recommended to key stakeholders to identify the impact of the e-learning course and refined CPOE initiatives on both end-user satisfaction and patient outcomes in the medical-surgical ICU. Findings from the study informed the impact of e-learning educational modules with CPOE system implementation. Those in organizations implementing advanced technology such as CPOE and EHR systems in critical care settings will find this paper of interest

A review of human factors principles for the design and implementation of medication safety alerts in clinical information systems.

The objective of this review is to describe the implementation of human factors principles for the design of alerts in clinical information systems. First, we conduct a review of alarm systems to identify human factors principles that are employed in the design and implementation of alerts. Second, we review the medical informatics literature to provide examples of the implementation of human factors principles in current clinical information systems using alerts to provide medication decision support. Last, we suggest actionable recommendations for delivering effective clinical decision support using alerts. A review of studies from the medical informatics literature suggests that many basic human factors principles are not followed, possibly contributing to the lack of acceptance of alerts in clinical information systems. We evaluate the limitations of current alerting philosophies and provide recommendations for improving acceptance of alerts by incorporating human factors principles in their design

Predicting Computerized Physician Order Entry System Adoption in US Hospitals: Can the Federal Mandate Be Met?

Objectives: The purpose of this study is four-fold. First, the hospitals‘ current level of computerized physician order entry (CPOE) adoption is reported; second, internal and external influence factors‘ roles in determining CPOE adoption rates are described; third, the future diffusion rate of CPOE systems in US hospitals is empirically predicted; finally, the current technology‘s state-of-the-art is assessed. Data source: Secondary data from 3 years of the Leapfrog Group‘s annual survey (2002–2004) of US tertiary-care hospitals. Study design: This study estimates CPOE market penetration rates applying technology diffusion theory and Bass modeling techniques for three future CPOE adoption scenarios—=Optimistic,‘ =Best estimate‘, and =Conservative‘ are empirically derived. Principal findings: Two of the CPOE adoption scenarios have diffusion S-curve that indicates a technology will achieve significant market penetration. Under current conditions, CPOE adoption in urban hospitals will not reach 80% penetration until 2029. Conclusions: The promise of improved quality of care through medication error reductions and significant cost controls prompted the Institute of Medicine to call for universal CPOE adoption by 1999. However, the CPOE products available as of 2006 represent only a =second generation technology‘, characterized by many limitations. Without increased external and internal pressures, such CPOE systems are unlikely to achieve full diffusion in US hospitals in a timely manner. Alternatively, developing a new generation of CPOE technology that is more =user-friendly‘ and easily integrated into hospitals‘ legacy systems may be a more expedient approach to achieving widespread adoption

Medication errors: a prospective cohort study of hand-written and computerised physician order entry in the intensive care unit

INTRODUCTION: The study aimed to compare the impact of computerised physician order entry (CPOE) without decision support with hand-written prescribing (HWP) on the frequency, type and outcome of medication errors (MEs) in the intensive care unit. METHODS: Details of MEs were collected before, and at several time points after, the change from HWP to CPOE. The study was conducted in a London teaching hospital's 22-bedded general ICU. The sampling periods were 28 weeks before and 2, 10, 25 and 37 weeks after introduction of CPOE. The unit pharmacist prospectively recorded details of MEs and the total number of drugs prescribed daily during the data collection periods, during the course of his normal chart review. RESULTS: The total proportion of MEs was significantly lower with CPOE (117 errors from 2429 prescriptions, 4.8%) than with HWP (69 errors from 1036 prescriptions, 6.7%) (p < 0.04). The proportion of errors reduced with time following the introduction of CPOE (p < 0.001). Two errors with CPOE led to patient harm requiring an increase in length of stay and, if administered, three prescriptions with CPOE could potentially have led to permanent harm or death. Differences in the types of error between systems were noted. There was a reduction in major/moderate patient outcomes with CPOE when non-intercepted and intercepted errors were combined (p = 0.01). The mean baseline APACHE II score did not differ significantly between the HWP and the CPOE periods (19.4 versus 20.0, respectively, p = 0.71). CONCLUSION: Introduction of CPOE was associated with a reduction in the proportion of MEs and an improvement in the overall patient outcome score (if intercepted errors were included). Moderate and major errors, however, remain a significant concern with CPOE