BACKGROUND: Electronic prescribing has been advocated as an important tool for improving the safety and quality of medication use in ambulatory settings. However, widespread adoption of e-prescribing in ambulatory settings has yet to be realized. The determinants of successful implementation and use in these settings are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To describe the practice characteristics associated with implementation and use of e-prescribing in ambulatory settings. DESIGN: Multi-method qualitative case study of ambulatory practices before and after e-prescribing implementation. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen physicians and 31 staff members working in 12 practices scheduled for implementation of an e-prescribing program and purposively sampled to ensure a mix of practice size and physician specialty. MEASUREMENTS: Field researchers used observational and interview techniques to collect data on prescription-related clinical workflow, information technology experience, and expectations. RESULTS: Five practices fully implemented e-prescribing, 3 installed but with only some prescribers or staff members using the program, 2 installed and then discontinued use, 2 failed to install. Compared to practice members in other groups, members of successful practices exhibited greater familiarity with the capabilities of health information technologies and had more modest expectations about the benefits likely to accrue from e-prescribing. Members of unsuccessful practices reported limited understanding of e-prescribing capabilities, expected that the program would increase the speed of clinical care and reported difficulties with technical aspects of the implementation and insufficient technical support. CONCLUSIONS: Practice leaders should plan implementation carefully, ensuring that practice members prepare for the effective integration of this technology into clinical workflow.
BACKGROUND: Electronic prescribing has been advocated as an important tool for improving the safety and quality of medication use in ambulatory settings. However, widespread adoption of e-prescribing in ambulatory settings has yet to be realized. The determinants of successful implementation and use in these settings are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To describe the practice characteristics associated with implementation and use of e-prescribing in ambulatory settings. DESIGN: Multi-method qualitative case study of ambulatory practices before and after e-prescribing implementation. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen physicians and 31 staff members working in 12 practices scheduled for implementation of an e-prescribing program and purposively sampled to ensure a mix of practice size and physician specialty. MEASUREMENTS: Field researchers used observational and interview techniques to collect data on prescription-related clinical workflow, information technology experience, and expectations. RESULTS: Five practices fully implemented e-prescribing, 3 installed but with only some prescribers or staff members using the program, 2 installed and then discontinued use, 2 failed to install. Compared to practice members in other groups, members of successful practices exhibited greater familiarity with the capabilities of health information technologies and had more modest expectations about the benefits likely to accrue from e-prescribing. Members of unsuccessful practices reported limited understanding of e-prescribing capabilities, expected that the program would increase the speed of clinical care and reported difficulties with technical aspects of the implementation and insufficient technical support. CONCLUSIONS: Practice leaders should plan implementation carefully, ensuring that practice members prepare for the effective integration of this technology into clinical workflow.
Authors: Basit Chaudhry; Jerome Wang; Shinyi Wu; Margaret Maglione; Walter Mojica; Elizabeth Roth; Sally C Morton; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-04-11 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Steven R Simon; Rainu Kaushal; Paul D Cleary; Chelsea A Jenter; Lynn A Volk; Eric G Poon; E John Orav; Helen G Lo; Deborah H Williams; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2006-10-26 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: R Tamblyn; R Laprise; J A Hanley; M Abrahamowicz; S Scott; N Mayo; J Hurley; R Grad; E Latimer; R Perreault; P McLeod; A Huang; P Larochelle; L Mallet Journal: JAMA Date: 2001 Jan 24-31 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Robyn Tamblyn; Allen Huang; Yuko Kawasumi; Gillian Bartlett; Roland Grad; André Jacques; Martin Dawes; Michal Abrahamowicz; Robert Perreault; Laurel Taylor; Nancy Winslade; Lise Poissant; Alain Pinsonneault Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2005-12-15 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Marie-Pierre Gagnon; Marie Desmartis; Michel Labrecque; Josip Car; Claudia Pagliari; Pierre Pluye; Pierre Frémont; Johanne Gagnon; Nadine Tremblay; France Légaré Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Erika L Abramson; Sameer Malhotra; Karen Fischer; Alison Edwards; Elizabeth R Pfoh; S Nena Osorio; Adam Cheriff; Rainu Kaushal Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-04-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jesse C Crosson; Rebecca S Etz; Shinyi Wu; Susan G Straus; David Eisenman; Douglas S Bell Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2011 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Stephanie O Zandieh; Erika L Abramson; Elizabeth R Pfoh; Kay Yoon-Flannery; Alison Edwards; Rainu Kaushal Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-08-28 Impact factor: 4.497