Qualitative study exploring the phenomenon of multiple electronic prescribing systems within single hospital organisations

BACKGROUND: A previous census of electronic prescribing (EP) systems in England showed that more than half of hospitals with EP reported more than one EP system within the same hospital. Our objectives were to describe the rationale for having multiple EP systems within a single hospital, and to explore perceptions of stakeholders about the advantages and disadvantages of multiple systems including any impact on patient safety. METHODS: Hospitals were selected from previous census respondents. A decision matrix was developed to achieve a maximum variation sample, and snowball sampling used to recruit stakeholders of different professional backgrounds. We then used an a priori framework to guide and analyse semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Ten participants, comprising pharmacists and doctors and a nurse, were interviewed from four hospitals. The findings suggest that use of multiple EP systems was not strategically planned. Three co-existing models of EP systems adoption in hospitals were identified: organisation-led, clinician-led and clinical network-led, which may have contributed to multiple systems use. Although there were some perceived benefits of multiple EP systems, particularly in niche specialities, many disadvantages were described. These included issues related to access, staff training, workflow, work duplication, and system interfacing. Fragmentation of documentation of the patient's journey was a major safety concern. DISCUSSION: The complexity of EP systems' adoption and deficiencies in IT strategic planning may have contributed to multiple EP systems use in the NHS. In the near to mid-term, multiple EP systems may remain in place in many English hospitals, which may create challenges to quality and patient safety.Peer reviewe

A Prescription for Improving Drug Formulary Decision Making

Gordon Schiff and colleagues present a new tool and checklist to help formularies make decisions about drug inclusion and to guide rational drug use

The frequency of missed test results and associated treatment delays in a highly computerized health system

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background:</p> <p>Diagnostic errors associated with the failure to follow up on abnormal diagnostic studies ("missed results") are a potential cause of treatment delay and a threat to patient safety. Few data exist concerning the frequency of missed results and associated treatment delays within the Veterans Health Administration (VA).</p> <p>Objective:</p> <p>The primary objective of the current study was to assess the frequency of missed results and resulting treatment delays encountered by primary care providers in VA clinics.</p> <p>Methods:</p> <p>An anonymous on-line survey of primary care providers was conducted as part of the health systems ongoing quality improvement programs. We collected information from providers concerning their clinical effort (e.g., number of clinic sessions, number of patient visits per session), number of patients with missed abnormal test results, and the number and types of treatment delays providers encountered during the two week period prior to administration of our survey.</p> <p>Results:</p> <p>The survey was completed by 106 out of 198 providers (54 percent response rate). Respondents saw and average of 86 patients per 2 week period. Providers encountered 64 patients with missed results during the two week period leading up to the study and 52 patients with treatment delays. The most common missed results included imaging studies (29 percent), clinical laboratory (22 percent), anatomic pathology (9 percent), and other (40 percent). The most common diagnostic delays were cancer (34 percent), endocrine problems (26 percent), cardiac problems (16 percent), and others (24 percent).</p> <p>Conclusion:</p> <p>Missed results leading to clinically important treatment delays are an important and likely underappreciated source of diagnostic error.</p

Effects of type and level of training on variation in physician knowledge in the use and acquisition of blood cultures: a cross sectional survey

BACKGROUND: Blood culture (BCX) use is often sub-optimal, and is a user-dependent diagnostic test. Little is known about physician training and BCX-related knowledge. We sought to assess variations in caregiver BCX-related knowledge, and their relation to medical training. METHODS: We developed and piloted a self-administered BCX-related knowledge survey instrument. Expert opinion, literature review, focus groups, and mini-pilots reduced > 100 questions in multiple formats to a final questionnaire with 15 scored content items and 4 covariate identifiers. This questionnaire was used in a cross-sectional survey of physicians, fellows, residents and medical students at a large urban public teaching hospital. The responses were stratified by years/level of training, type of specialty training, self-reported practical and theoretical BCX-related instruction. Summary scores were derived from participant responses compared to a 95% consensus opinion of infectious diseases specialists that matched an evidence based reference standard. RESULTS: There were 291 respondents (Attendings = 72, Post-Graduate Year (PGY) = 3 = 84, PGY2 = 42, PGY1 = 41, medical students = 52). Mean scores differed by training level (Attending = 85.0, PGY3 = 81.1, PGY2 = 78.4, PGY1 = 75.4, students = 67.7) [p ≤ 0.001], and training type (Infectious Diseases = 96.1, Medicine = 81.7, Emergency Medicine = 79.6, Surgery = 78.5, Family Practice = 76.5, Obstetrics-Gynecology = 74.4, Pediatrics = 74.0) [p ≤ 0.001]. Higher summary scores were associated with self-reported theoretical [p ≤ 0.001] and practical [p = 0.001] BCX-related training. Linear regression showed level and type of training accounted for most of the score variation. CONCLUSION: Higher mean scores were associated with advancing level of training and greater subject-related training. Notably, house staff and medical students, who are most likely to order and/or obtain BCXs, lack key BCX-related knowledge. Targeted education may improve utilization of this important diagnostic tool

Evidence-based decision support for pediatric rheumatology reduces diagnostic errors.

BACKGROUND: The number of trained specialists world-wide is insufficient to serve all children with pediatric rheumatologic disorders, even in the countries with robust medical resources. We evaluated the potential of diagnostic decision support software (DDSS) to alleviate this shortage by assessing the ability of such software to improve the diagnostic accuracy of non-specialists. METHODS: Using vignettes of actual clinical cases, clinician testers generated a differential diagnosis before and after using diagnostic decision support software. The evaluation used the SimulConsult® DDSS tool, based on Bayesian pattern matching with temporal onset of each finding in each disease. The tool covered 5405 diseases (averaging 22 findings per disease). Rheumatology content in the database was developed using both primary references and textbooks. The frequency, timing, age of onset and age of disappearance of findings, as well as their incidence, treatability, and heritability were taken into account in order to guide diagnostic decision making. These capabilities allowed key information such as pertinent negatives and evolution over time to be used in the computations. Efficacy was measured by comparing whether the correct condition was included in the differential diagnosis generated by clinicians before using the software ( unaided ), versus after use of the DDSS ( aided ). RESULTS: The 26 clinicians demonstrated a significant reduction in diagnostic errors following introduction of the software, from 28% errors while unaided to 15% using decision support (p \u3c 0.0001). Improvement was greatest for emergency medicine physicians (p = 0.013) and clinicians in practice for less than 10 years (p = 0.012). This error reduction occurred despite the fact that testers employed an open book approach to generate their initial lists of potential diagnoses, spending an average of 8.6 min using printed and electronic sources of medical information before using the diagnostic software. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that decision support can reduce diagnostic errors and improve use of relevant information by generalists. Such assistance could potentially help relieve the shortage of experts in pediatric rheumatology and similarly underserved specialties by improving generalists\u27 ability to evaluate and diagnose patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02205086

The quality case for information technology in healthcare

BACKGROUND: As described in the Institute of Medicine's Crossing the Quality Chasm report, the quality of health care in the U.S. today leaves much to be desired. DISCUSSION: One major opportunity for improving quality relates to increasing the use of information technology, or IT. Health care organizations currently invest less in IT than in any other information-intensive industry, and not surprisingly current systems are relatively primitive, compared with industries such as banking or aviation. Nonetheless, a number of organizations have demonstrated that quality can be substantially improved in a variety of ways if IT use is increased in ways that improve care. Specifically, computerization of processes that are error-prone and computerized decision support may substantially improve both efficiency and quality, as well as dramatically facilitate quality measurement. This report discusses the current levels of IT and quality in health care, how quality improvement and management are currently done, the evidence that more IT might be helpful, a vision of the future, and the barriers to getting there. SUMMARY: This report suggests that there are five key policy domains that need to be addressed: standards, incentives, security and confidentiality, professional involvement, and research, with financial incentives representing the single most important lever

Patient- and system-related barriers for the earlier diagnosis of colorectal cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A cohort of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients represents an opportunity to study missed opportunities for earlier diagnosis. Primary objective: To study the epidemiology of diagnostic delays and failures to offer/complete CRC screening. Secondary objective: To identify system- and patient-related factors that may contribute to diagnostic delays or failures to offer/complete CRC screening.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Setting: Rural Veterans Administration (VA) Healthcare system. Participants: CRC cases diagnosed within the VA between 1/1/2000 and 3/1/2007. Data sources: progress notes, orders, and pathology, laboratory, and imaging results obtained between 1/1/1995 and 12/31/2007. Completed CRC screening was defined as a fecal occult blood test or flexible sigmoidoscopy (both within five years), or colonoscopy (within 10 years); delayed diagnosis was defined as a gap of more than six months between an abnormal test result and evidence of clinician response. A summary abstract of the antecedent clinical care for each patient was created by a certified gastroenterologist (GI), who jointly reviewed and coded the abstracts with a general internist (TW).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The study population consisted of 150 CRC cases that met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 69.04 (range 35-91); 99 (66%) were diagnosed due to symptoms; 61 cases (46%) had delays associated with system factors; of them, 57 (38% of the total) had delayed responses to abnormal findings. Fifteen of the cases (10%) had prompt symptom evaluations but received no CRC screening; no patient factors were identified as potentially contributing to the failure to screen/offer to screen. In total, 97 (65%) of the cases had missed opportunities for early diagnosis and 57 (38%) had patient factors that likely contributed to the diagnostic delay or apparent failure to screen/offer to screen.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Missed opportunities for earlier CRC diagnosis were frequent. Additional studies of clinical data management, focusing on following up abnormal findings, and offering/completing CRC screening, are needed.</p

A cognitive forcing tool to mitigate cognitive bias:A randomised control trial

Abstract Background Cognitive bias is an important source of diagnostic error yet is a challenging area to understand and teach. Our aim was to determine whether a cognitive forcing tool can reduce the rates of error in clinical decision making. A secondary objective was to understand the process by which this effect might occur. Methods We hypothesised that using a cognitive forcing tool would reduce diagnostic error rates. To test this hypothesis, a novel online case-based approach was used to conduct a single blinded randomized clinical trial conducted from January 2017 to September 2018. In addition, a qualitative series of “think aloud” interviews were conducted with 20 doctors from a UK teaching hospital in 2018. The primary outcome was the diagnostic error rate when solving bias inducing clinical vignettes. A volunteer sample of medical professionals from across the UK, Republic of Ireland and North America. They ranged in seniority from medical student to Attending Physician. Results Seventy six participants were included in the study. The data showed doctors of all grades routinely made errors related to cognitive bias. There was no difference in error rates between groups (mean 2.8 cases correct in intervention vs 3.1 in control group, 95% CI -0.94 – 0.45 P = 0.49). The qualitative protocol revealed that the cognitive forcing strategy was well received and a produced a subjectively positive impact on doctors’ accuracy and thoughtfulness in clinical cases. Conclusions The quantitative data failed to show an improvement in accuracy despite a positive qualitative experience. There is insufficient evidence to recommend this tool in clinical practice, however the qualitative data suggests such an approach has some merit and face validity to users

U.S. Physicians’ Views on Financing Options to Expand Health Insurance Coverage: A National Survey

Background: Physician opinion can influence the prospects for health care reform, yet there are few recent data on physician views on reform proposals or access to medical care in the United States. Objective: To assess physician views on financing options for expanding health care coverage and on access to health care. Design and Participants: Nationally representative mail survey conducted between March 2007 and October 2007 of U.S. physicians engaged in direct patient care. Measurements: Rated support for reform options including financial incentives to induce individuals to purchase health insurance and single-payer national health insurance; rated views of several dimensions of access to care. Main results: 1,675 of 3,300 physicians responded (50.8%). Only 9% of physicians preferred the current employer-based financing system. Forty-nine percent favored either tax incentives or penalties to encourage the purchase of medical insurance, and 42% preferred a government-run, taxpayer-financed single-payer national health insurance program. The majority of respondents believed that all Americans should receive needed medical care regardless of ability to pay (89%); 33% believed that the uninsured currently have access to needed care. Nearly one fifth of respondents (19.3%) believed that even the insured lack access to needed care. Views about access were independently associated with support for single-payer national health insurance. Conclusions: The vast majority of physicians surveyed supported a change in the health care financing system. While a plurality support the use of financial incentives, a substantial proportion support single payer national health insurance. These findings challenge the perception that fundamental restructuring of the U.S. health care financing system receives little acceptance by physicians

Comparisons of mortality and pre-discharge respiratory outcomes in small-for-gestational-age and appropriate-for-gestational-age premature infants

BACKGROUND: There are differences in the literature regarding outcomes of premature small-for-gestational-age (SGA) and appropriate-for gestational-age (AGA) infants, possibly due to failure to take into account gestational age at birth. OBJECTIVE: To compare mortality and respiratory morbidity of SGA and AGA premature newborn infants. DESIGN/METHODS: A retrospective study was done of the 2,487 infants born without congenital anomalies at ≤36 weeks of gestation and admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) at John Dempsey Hospital, between Jan. 1992 and Dec. 1999. Recent (1994–96) U.S. birth weight percentiles for gestational age (GA), race and gender were used to classify neonates as SGA (<10th percentile for GA) or AGA (10(th)–90th percentile for GA). Using multivariate logistic regression and survival analyses to control for GA, SGA and AGA infants were compared for mortality and respiratory morbidity. RESULTS: Controlling for GA, premature SGA infants were at a higher risk for mortality (Odds ratio 3.1, P = 0.001) and at lower risk of respiratory distress syndrome (OR = 0.71, p = 0.02) than AGA infants. However multivariate logistic regression modeling found that the odds of having respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) varied between SGA and AGA infants by GA. There was no change in RDS risk in SGA infants at GA ≤ 32 wk (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.32 – 1.98) but significantly decreased risk for RDS at GA > 32 wk (OR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.27 – 0.63; p < 0.01). After controlling for GA, SGA infants were observed to be at a significantly higher risk for developing chronic lung disease as compared to AGA infants (OR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.2 – 3.9, P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between SGA and AGA infants in total days on ventilator. Among infants who survived, mean length of hospital stay was significantly higher in SGA infants born between 26–36 wks GA than AGA infants. CONCLUSIONS: Premature SGA infants have significantly higher mortality, significantly higher risk of developing chronic lung disease and longer hospital stay as compared to premature AGA infants. Even the reduced risk of RDS in infants born at ≥32 wk GA, (conferred possibly by intra-uterine stress leading to accelerated lung maturation) appears to be of transient effect and is counterbalanced by adverse effects of poor intrauterine growth on long term pulmonary outcomes such as chronic lung disease