BACKGROUND: Physician requests for additional testing on an existing laboratory specimen (add-ons) are resource intensive and generally require a phone call to the laboratory. Verbal orders such as these have been noted to be associated with errors in accuracy. The aim of this study was to compare a novel computerized system for add-on requests to the prior verbal system. METHOD: We compare the computerized add-on request system to the verbal system with respect to order completeness and workflow. RESULTS: We demonstrate that the computerized add-on system resulted in the complete in-laboratory documentation of the add-on request 100% of the time, compared to 58% with the verbal add-on system. In addition, we show that documentation of a verbal add-on request in the electronic medical record (EMR) occurred for 4% of requests, while in the computerized system EMR documentation occurred 100% of the time. We further demonstrate that the computerized add-on request process was well accepted by providers and did not significantly change the test mix of the add-on requests. CONCLUSIONS: In computerized physician order entry (CPOE) implementations, add-on order functionality should be considered so these orders are documented in the EMR.
BACKGROUND: Physician requests for additional testing on an existing laboratory specimen (add-ons) are resource intensive and generally require a phone call to the laboratory. Verbal orders such as these have been noted to be associated with errors in accuracy. The aim of this study was to compare a novel computerized system for add-on requests to the prior verbal system. METHOD: We compare the computerized add-on request system to the verbal system with respect to order completeness and workflow. RESULTS: We demonstrate that the computerized add-on system resulted in the complete in-laboratory documentation of the add-on request 100% of the time, compared to 58% with the verbal add-on system. In addition, we show that documentation of a verbal add-on request in the electronic medical record (EMR) occurred for 4% of requests, while in the computerized system EMR documentation occurred 100% of the time. We further demonstrate that the computerized add-on request process was well accepted by providers and did not significantly change the test mix of the add-on requests. CONCLUSIONS: In computerized physician order entry (CPOE) implementations, add-on order functionality should be considered so these orders are documented in the EMR.
Authors: Euan J McCaughey; Elia Vecellio; Rebecca Lake; Ling Li; Leslie Burnett; Douglas Chesher; Stephen Braye; Mark Mackay; Stephanie Gay; Tony C Badrick; Johanna I Westbrook; Andrew Georgiou Journal: Clin Biochem Rev Date: 2016-12