Literature DB >> 28566988

The Impact of Order Source Misattribution on Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Performance Metrics.

George A Gellert1, Linda Catzoela2, Lajja Patel3, Kylynn Bruner2, Felix Friedman4, Ricardo Ramirez2, Lilliana Saucedo2, S Luke Webster5, John A Gillean2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One strategy to foster adoption of computerized provider order entry (CPOE) by physicians is the monthly distribution of a list identifying the number and use rate percentage of orders entered electronically versus on paper by each physician in the facility. Physicians care about CPOE use rate reports because they support the patient safety and quality improvement objectives of CPOE implementation. Certain physician groups are also motivated because they participate in contracted financial and performance arrangements that include incentive payments or financial penalties for meeting (or failing to meet) a specified CPOE use rate target. Misattribution of order sources can hinder accurate measurement of individual physician CPOE use and can thereby undermine providers' confidence in their reported performance, as well as their motivation to utilize CPOE. Misattribution of order sources also has significant patient safety, quality, and medicolegal implications.
OBJECTIVE: This analysis sought to evaluate the magnitude and sources of misattribution among hospitalists with high CPOE use and, if misattribution was found, to formulate strategies to prevent and reduce its recurrence, thereby ensuring the integrity and credibility of individual and facility CPOE use rate reporting.
METHODS: A detailed manual order source review and validation of all orders issued by one hospitalist group at a midsize community hospital was conducted for a one-month study period.
RESULTS: We found that a small but not dismissible percentage of orders issued by hospitalists-up to 4.18 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 3.84-4.56 percent) per month-were attributed inaccurately. Sources of misattribution by department or function were as follows: nursing, 42 percent; pharmacy, 38 percent; laboratory, 15 percent; unit clerk, 3 percent; and radiology, 2 percent. Order management and protocol were the most common correct order sources that were incorrectly attributed.
CONCLUSION: Order source misattribution can negatively affect reported provider CPOE use rates and should be investigated if providers perceive discrepancies between reported rates and their actual performance. Preventive education and communication efforts across departments can help prevent and reduce misattribution.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CPOE attribution error; CPOE misattribution; CPOE performance metrics; computerized provider order entry (CPOE)

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28566988      PMCID: PMC5430133     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perspect Health Inf Manag        ISSN: 1559-4122


  22 in total

1.  The impact of computerized provider order entry on medication errors in a multispecialty group practice.

Authors:  Emily Beth Devine; Ryan N Hansen; Jennifer L Wilson-Norton; N M Lawless; Albert W Fisk; David K Blough; Diane P Martin; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Impact of a computerized physician order entry system on compliance with prescription accuracy requirements.

Authors:  Caroline Mir; Amina Gadri; Georges L Zelger; Renaud Pichon; André Pannatier
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2009-06-25

Review 3.  The impact of computerized provider order entry systems on medical-imaging services: a systematic review.

Authors:  Andrew Georgiou; Mirela Prgomet; Andrew Markewycz; Edwina Adams; Johanna I Westbrook
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-03-08       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Impact of computerized provider order entry on pharmacist productivity.

Authors:  Mark D Hatfield; Rodney Cox; Shivani K Mhatre; W Perry Flowers; Sujit S Sansgiry
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2014-05

5.  Computerized provider order entry reduces length of stay in a community hospital.

Authors:  R Schreiber; K Peters; S H Shaha
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 2.342

Review 6.  The effectiveness of integrated health information technologies across the phases of medication management: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  K Ann McKibbon; Cynthia Lokker; Steven M Handler; Lisa R Dolovich; Anne M Holbrook; Daria O'Reilly; Robyn Tamblyn; Brian J Hemens; Runki Basu; Sue Troyan; Pavel S Roshanov
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 7.  Computerized prescriber order entry in the outpatient oncology setting: from evidence to meaningful use.

Authors:  V Kukreti; R Cosby; A Cheung; S Lankshear
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 8.  A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care.

Authors:  John T James
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 2.844

Review 9.  Impact of emerging technologies on medication errors and adverse drug events.

Authors:  Eyal Oren; Ellen R Shaffer; B Joseph Guglielmo
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 2.980

10.  An Observational Study of the Impact of a Computerized Physician Order Entry System on the Rate of Medication Errors in an Orthopaedic Surgery Unit.

Authors:  Fabien Hernandez; Elyes Majoul; Carlota Montes-Palacios; Marie Antignac; Bertrand Cherrier; Levon Doursounian; Jean-Marc Feron; Cyrille Robert; Gilles Hejblum; Christine Fernandez; Patrick Hindlet
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  The impact of a multilevel interactive nursing quality control and audit application on nursing quality management.

Authors:  K O Pei-Ying; H O Chen-Shie; L I A O Pei-Hung
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2021-12-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.