Sabrina J Poon1,2,3, Margaret B Greenwood-Ericksen1,2,3, Rebecca E Gish2, Pamela M Neri4, Sukhjit S Takhar2,5, Scott G Weiner2,5, Jeremiah D Schuur2,5, Adam B Landman2,5. 1. Harvard Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency, Boston, MA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. 4. Clinical and Quality Analysis, Partners Healthcare, Wellesley, MA. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are underutilized, despite evidence showing that they may reduce the epidemic of opioid-related addiction, diversion, and overdose. We evaluated the usability of the Massachusetts (MA) PDMP by emergency medicine providers (EPs), as a system's usability may affect how often it is used. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study of 17 EPs. We compared the time and number of clicks required to review one patient's record in the PDMP to three other commonly performed computer-based tasks in the emergency department (ED: ordering a computed tomography [CT] scan, writing a prescription, and searching a medication history service integrated within the electronic medical record [EMR]). We performed semistructured interviews and analyzed participant comments and responses regarding their experience using the MA PDMP. RESULTS: The PDMP task took a longer time to complete (mean = 4.22 minutes) and greater number of mouse clicks to complete (mean = 50.3 clicks) than the three other tasks (CT-pulmonary embolism = 1.42 minutes, 24.8 clicks; prescription = 1.30 minutes, 19.5 clicks; SureScripts = 1.45 minutes, 9.5 clicks). Qualitative analysis yielded four main themes about PDMP usability, three negative and one positive: 1) difficulty accessing the PDMP, 2) cumbersome acquiring patient medication history information within the PDMP, 3) nonintuitive display of patient medication history information within the PDMP, and 4) overall perceived value of the PDMP despite an inefficient interface. CONCLUSIONS: The complicated processes of gaining access to, logging in, and using the MA PDMP are barriers to preventing its more frequent use. All states should evaluate the PDMP usability in multiple practice settings including the ED and work to improve provider enrollment, login procedures, patient information input, prescription data display, and ultimately, PDMP data integration into EMRs.
OBJECTIVES: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are underutilized, despite evidence showing that they may reduce the epidemic of opioid-related addiction, diversion, and overdose. We evaluated the usability of the Massachusetts (MA) PDMP by emergency medicine providers (EPs), as a system's usability may affect how often it is used. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study of 17 EPs. We compared the time and number of clicks required to review one patient's record in the PDMP to three other commonly performed computer-based tasks in the emergency department (ED: ordering a computed tomography [CT] scan, writing a prescription, and searching a medication history service integrated within the electronic medical record [EMR]). We performed semistructured interviews and analyzed participant comments and responses regarding their experience using the MA PDMP. RESULTS: The PDMP task took a longer time to complete (mean = 4.22 minutes) and greater number of mouse clicks to complete (mean = 50.3 clicks) than the three other tasks (CT-pulmonary embolism = 1.42 minutes, 24.8 clicks; prescription = 1.30 minutes, 19.5 clicks; SureScripts = 1.45 minutes, 9.5 clicks). Qualitative analysis yielded four main themes about PDMP usability, three negative and one positive: 1) difficulty accessing the PDMP, 2) cumbersome acquiring patient medication history information within the PDMP, 3) nonintuitive display of patient medication history information within the PDMP, and 4) overall perceived value of the PDMP despite an inefficient interface. CONCLUSIONS: The complicated processes of gaining access to, logging in, and using the MA PDMP are barriers to preventing its more frequent use. All states should evaluate the PDMP usability in multiple practice settings including the ED and work to improve provider enrollment, login procedures, patient information input, prescription data display, and ultimately, PDMP data integration into EMRs.
Authors: Matthew J Witry; Barbara J St Marie; Brahmendra Reddy Viyyuri; Paul D Windschitl Journal: Pain Manag Nurs Date: 2019-05-24 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: Benjamin C Sun; Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann; Christina J Charlesworth; Hyunjee Kim; Daniel M Hartung; Richard A Deyo; K John McConnell Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Kathryn Hawk; Gail D'Onofrio; David A Fiellin; Marek C Chawarski; Patrick G O'Connor; Patricia H Owens; Michael V Pantalon; Steven L Bernstein Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2017-12-26 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Marcus A Bachhuber; Brendan Saloner; Marc LaRochelle; Jessica S Merlin; Brandon C Maughan; Dan Polsky; Naum Shaparin; Sean M Murphy Journal: Pain Med Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Gillian J Leichtling; Jessica M Irvine; Christi Hildebran; Deborah J Cohen; Sara E Hallvik; Richard A Deyo Journal: Pain Med Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Christopher D Saffore; Sarette T Tilton; Stephanie Y Crawford; Michael A Fischer; Todd A Lee; A Simon Pickard; Lisa K Sharp Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Mary Jo Larson; Cheryl Browne; Ruslan V Nikitin; Nikki R Wooten; Sarah Ball; Rachel Sayko Adams; Kelly Barth Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2018-05-04 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Benjamin C Sun; Christina J Charlesworth; Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann; Jenny I Young; Hyunjee Kim; Daniel M Hartung; Richard A Deyo; K John McConnell Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-12-13 Impact factor: 5.721