Erik G Van Eaton1, Douglas F Zatzick2, Thomas H Gallagher3, Peter Tarczy-Hornoch4, Frederick P Rivara5, David R Flum6, Roselyn Peterson2, Ronald V Maier6. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Electronic address: vane@u.washington.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 4. Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 6. Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that electronic medical record (EMR) information technology innovations can enhance the quality of trauma center care, few investigations have systematically assessed United States (US) trauma center EMR capacity, particularly for screening of mental health comorbidities. STUDY DESIGN: Trauma programs at all US level I and II trauma centers were contacted and asked to complete a survey regarding health information technology (IT) and EMR capacity. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-one of 525 (74%) US level I and II trauma centers responded to the survey. More than 90% of trauma centers reported the ability to create custom patient tracking lists in their EMR. Forty-seven percent of centers were interested in automating a blood alcohol content screening process; only 14% reported successfully using their EMR to perform this task. Marked variation was observed across trauma center sites with regard to the types of EMR systems used as well as rates of adoption and turnover of EMR systems. CONCLUSIONS: Most US level I and II trauma centers have installed EMR systems; however, marked heterogeneity exists with regard to EMR type, available features, and turnover. A minority of centers have leveraged their EMR for screening of mental health comorbidities among trauma inpatients. Greater attention to effective EMR use is warranted from trauma accreditation organizations.
BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that electronic medical record (EMR) information technology innovations can enhance the quality of trauma center care, few investigations have systematically assessed United States (US) trauma center EMR capacity, particularly for screening of mental health comorbidities. STUDY DESIGN:Trauma programs at all US level I and II trauma centers were contacted and asked to complete a survey regarding health information technology (IT) and EMR capacity. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-one of 525 (74%) US level I and II trauma centers responded to the survey. More than 90% of trauma centers reported the ability to create custom patient tracking lists in their EMR. Forty-seven percent of centers were interested in automating a blood alcohol content screening process; only 14% reported successfully using their EMR to perform this task. Marked variation was observed across trauma center sites with regard to the types of EMR systems used as well as rates of adoption and turnover of EMR systems. CONCLUSIONS: Most US level I and II trauma centers have installed EMR systems; however, marked heterogeneity exists with regard to EMR type, available features, and turnover. A minority of centers have leveraged their EMR for screening of mental health comorbidities among trauma inpatients. Greater attention to effective EMR use is warranted from trauma accreditation organizations.
Authors: Douglas Zatzick; Gregory J Jurkovich; Frederick P Rivara; Jin Wang; Ming-Yu Fan; Jutta Joesch; Ellen Mackenzie Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Shahid Shafi; Avery B Nathens; H Gill Cryer; Mark R Hemmila; Michael D Pasquale; David E Clark; Melanie Neal; Sandra Goble; J Wayne Meredith; John J Fildes Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-08-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Douglas Zatzick; Dennis Donovan; Christopher Dunn; Joan Russo; Jin Wang; Gregory Jurkovich; Frederick Rivara; Lauren Whiteside; Richard Ries; Larry Gentilello Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2012-09-19
Authors: Ellen J MacKenzie; David B Hoyt; John C Sacra; Gregory J Jurkovich; Anthony R Carlini; Sandra D Teitelbaum; Harry Teter Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-03-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rajeev Ramchand; Grant N Marshall; Terry L Schell; Lisa H Jaycox; Katrin Hambarsoomians; Vivek Shetty; Gudata S Hinika; H Gill Cryer; Peter Meade; Howard Belzberg Journal: J Trauma Date: 2009-05
Authors: Douglas F Zatzick; Frederick P Rivara; Avery B Nathens; Gregory J Jurkovich; Jin Wang; Ming-Yu Fan; Joan Russo; David S Salkever; Ellen J Mackenzie Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2007-06-11 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Douglas Zatzick; Stephen S O'Connor; Joan Russo; Jin Wang; Nigel Bush; Jeff Love; Roselyn Peterson; Leah Ingraham; Doyanne Darnell; Lauren Whiteside; Erik Van Eaton Journal: J Trauma Stress Date: 2015-10
Authors: Lauren K Whiteside; Marie C Vrablik; Joan Russo; Eileen M Bulger; Deepika Nehra; Kathleen Moloney; Douglas F Zatzick Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2021-01-28
Authors: Douglas F Zatzick; Joan Russo; Doyanne Darnell; David A Chambers; Lawrence Palinkas; Erik Van Eaton; Jin Wang; Leah M Ingraham; Roxanne Guiney; Patrick Heagerty; Bryan Comstock; Lauren K Whiteside; Gregory Jurkovich Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2016-04-30 Impact factor: 7.327