CONTEXT: The US emergency departments and poison control centers use telephone communication to exchange information about poison exposed patients. Electronically exchanged patient information could better support care for poisoned patients by improving information availability for decision making and by decreasing unnecessary emergency department telephone interruptions. As federal initiatives push to increase clinical health information exchange (HIE), it is essential to assess the readiness of US poison control centers. We conducted a nationwide Delphi study to determine consensus on legal, operational, and clinical considerations that are important for electronic information exchange between emergency departments and poison control centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A national panel of US experts (n = 71) in emergency medicine and poison control participated in a Delphi study, September-December 2010. Panelists rated statements describing concepts related to implementation, adoption, or potential outcomes of electronic information exchange between emergency departments and poison control centers. The statements reflected panelist responses to initial open-ended questions and literature-based concepts. RESULTS: A total of 71 panelists agreed to participate. The response rate for each round ranged from 0.73 to 0.77. Most (114/121) statements reached consensus. Seven statements failed to reach consensus. Panelists indicated that user involvement in the design of systems and tools is important. Workflow integration, safety, evidence of benefit, and outcomes are high-importance issues. DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONS: Future research and development related to electronic information exchange should address high-importance issues: safety, patient outcomes, workflow integration, and evidence of benefit. It should also address key barriers: initial and ongoing costs associated with electronic information exchange, the absence of software and tools to facilitate exchange, and the need for training. Users should be involved in the design of an electronic information exchange process, and the process should support, not replace, verbal communication.
CONTEXT: The US emergency departments and poison control centers use telephone communication to exchange information about poison exposed patients. Electronically exchanged patient information could better support care for poisoned patients by improving information availability for decision making and by decreasing unnecessary emergency department telephone interruptions. As federal initiatives push to increase clinical health information exchange (HIE), it is essential to assess the readiness of US poison control centers. We conducted a nationwide Delphi study to determine consensus on legal, operational, and clinical considerations that are important for electronic information exchange between emergency departments and poison control centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A national panel of US experts (n = 71) in emergency medicine and poison control participated in a Delphi study, September-December 2010. Panelists rated statements describing concepts related to implementation, adoption, or potential outcomes of electronic information exchange between emergency departments and poison control centers. The statements reflected panelist responses to initial open-ended questions and literature-based concepts. RESULTS: A total of 71 panelists agreed to participate. The response rate for each round ranged from 0.73 to 0.77. Most (114/121) statements reached consensus. Seven statements failed to reach consensus. Panelists indicated that user involvement in the design of systems and tools is important. Workflow integration, safety, evidence of benefit, and outcomes are high-importance issues. DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONS: Future research and development related to electronic information exchange should address high-importance issues: safety, patient outcomes, workflow integration, and evidence of benefit. It should also address key barriers: initial and ongoing costs associated with electronic information exchange, the absence of software and tools to facilitate exchange, and the need for training. Users should be involved in the design of an electronic information exchange process, and the process should support, not replace, verbal communication.
Authors: Scott D Nelson; Guilherme Del Fiol; Haley Hanseler; Barbara Insley Crouch; Mollie R Cummins Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-01-13 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Mollie R Cummins; Guilherme Del Fiol; Barbara I Crouch; Pallavi Ranade-Kharkar; Aly Khalifa; Andrew Iskander; Darren Mann; Matt Hoffman; Sid Thornton; Todd L Allen; Heather Bennett Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.497