OBJECTIVE: Computerized provider order entry (CPOE) has been shown to improve patient safety by reducing medication errors and subsequent adverse drug events (ADEs). Studies demonstrating these benefits have been conducted primarily in the inpatient setting, with fewer in the ambulatory setting. The objective was to evaluate the effect of a basic, ambulatory CPOE system on medication errors and associated ADEs. DESIGN: This quasiexperimental, pretest-post-test study was conducted in a community-based, multispecialty health system not affiliated with an academic medical center. The intervention was a basic CPOE system with limited clinical decision support capabilities. MEASUREMENT: Comparison of prescriptions written before (n=5016 handwritten) to after (n=5153 electronically prescribed) implementation of the CPOE system. The primary outcome was the occurrence of error(s); secondary outcomes were types and severity of errors. RESULTS: Frequency of errors declined from 18.2% to 8.2%-a reduction in adjusted odds of 70% (OR: 0.30; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.40). The largest reductions were seen in adjusted odds of errors of illegibility (97%), use of inappropriate abbreviations (94%) and missing information (85%). There was a 57% reduction in adjusted odds of errors that did not cause harm (potential ADEs) (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.49). The reduction in the number of errors that caused harm (preventable ADEs) was not statistically significant, perhaps due to few errors in this category. CONCLUSIONS: A basic CPOE system in a community setting was associated with a significant reduction in medication errors of most types and severity levels.
OBJECTIVE: Computerized provider order entry (CPOE) has been shown to improve patient safety by reducing medication errors and subsequent adverse drug events (ADEs). Studies demonstrating these benefits have been conducted primarily in the inpatient setting, with fewer in the ambulatory setting. The objective was to evaluate the effect of a basic, ambulatory CPOE system on medication errors and associated ADEs. DESIGN: This quasiexperimental, pretest-post-test study was conducted in a community-based, multispecialty health system not affiliated with an academic medical center. The intervention was a basic CPOE system with limited clinical decision support capabilities. MEASUREMENT: Comparison of prescriptions written before (n=5016 handwritten) to after (n=5153 electronically prescribed) implementation of the CPOE system. The primary outcome was the occurrence of error(s); secondary outcomes were types and severity of errors. RESULTS: Frequency of errors declined from 18.2% to 8.2%-a reduction in adjusted odds of 70% (OR: 0.30; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.40). The largest reductions were seen in adjusted odds of errors of illegibility (97%), use of inappropriate abbreviations (94%) and missing information (85%). There was a 57% reduction in adjusted odds of errors that did not cause harm (potential ADEs) (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.49). The reduction in the number of errors that caused harm (preventable ADEs) was not statistically significant, perhaps due to few errors in this category. CONCLUSIONS: A basic CPOE system in a community setting was associated with a significant reduction in medication errors of most types and severity levels.
Authors: Tejal K Gandhi; Saul N Weingart; Andrew C Seger; Joshua Borus; Elisabeth Burdick; Eric G Poon; Lucian L Leape; David W Bates Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Amit X Garg; Neill K J Adhikari; Heather McDonald; M Patricia Rosas-Arellano; P J Devereaux; Joseph Beyene; Justina Sam; R Brian Haynes Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-03-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rita A Snyder; Jacob Abarca; Jane L Meza; Jeffrey M Rothschild; Albert Rizos; David W Bates Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: B L Rotman; A N Sullivan; T W McDonald; B W Brown; P DeSmedt; D Goodnature; M C Higgins; H J Suermondt; C Young; D K Owens Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 1996 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Gilad J Kuperman; Anne Bobb; Thomas H Payne; Anthony J Avery; Tejal K Gandhi; Gerard Burns; David C Classen; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2006-10-26 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: D W Bates; J M Teich; J Lee; D Seger; G J Kuperman; N Ma'Luf; D Boyle; L Leape Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 1999 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: R S Evans; S L Pestotnik; D C Classen; T P Clemmer; L K Weaver; J F Orme; J F Lloyd; J P Burke Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-01-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew W Steele; Sheri Eisert; Joel Witter; Pat Lyons; Michael A Jones; Patricia Gabow; Eduardo Ortiz Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2005-09-06 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Erika L Abramson; David W Bates; Chelsea Jenter; Lynn A Volk; Yolanda Barrón; Jill Quaresimo; Andrew C Seger; Elisabeth Burdick; Steven Simon; Rainu Kaushal Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-12-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Renee E Coffman; Jeffrey P Bratberg; Schwanda K Flowers; Nanci L Murphy; Ruth E Nemire; Lowell J Anderson; William G Lang Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 2.047
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: Joan S Ash; Dean F Sittig; Adam Wright; Carmit McMullen; Michael Shapiro; Arwen Bunce; Blackford Middleton Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-04-19 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Karen C Nanji; Jeffrey M Rothschild; Claudia Salzberg; Carol A Keohane; Katherine Zigmont; Jim Devita; Tejal K Gandhi; Anuj K Dalal; David W Bates; Eric G Poon Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 4.497