Raj M Ratwani1, Allan Fong2, Josh S Puthumana2, Aaron Z Hettinger3. 1. National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, MedStar Health, Washington, DC; Department of Emergency Medicine, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. Electronic address: Raj.M.Ratwani@MedStar.net. 2. National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, MedStar Health, Washington, DC. 3. National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, MedStar Health, Washington, DC; Department of Emergency Medicine, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine whether emergency physicians use strategies to manage interruptions during clinical work. Interruption management strategies include immediately engaging the interruption by discontinuing the current task and starting the interruption, continuing the current task while engaging the interruption, rejecting the interruption, or delaying the interruption. METHODS: An observational time and motion study was conducted in 3 different urban, academic emergency departments with 18 attending emergency physicians. Each physician was observed for 2 hours, and the number of interruptions, source of interruptions, type of task being interrupted, and use of interruption management strategies were documented. RESULTS: Participants were interrupted on average of 12.5 times per hour. The majority of interruptions were in person from other staff, including nurses, residents, and other attending physicians. When participants were interrupted, they were often working on their computer. Participants almost always immediately engaged the interruption task (75.4% of the time), followed by multitasking, in which the primary task was continued while the interrupting task was performed (22.2%). Physicians rejected or delayed interruptions less than 2% of the time. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest there is an opportunity to introduce emergency physicians to the use of interruption management strategies as a method of handling the frequent interruptions they are exposed to. Use of these strategies when high-risk primary tasks are performed may reduce the disruptiveness of some interruptions and improve patient safety.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine whether emergency physicians use strategies to manage interruptions during clinical work. Interruption management strategies include immediately engaging the interruption by discontinuing the current task and starting the interruption, continuing the current task while engaging the interruption, rejecting the interruption, or delaying the interruption. METHODS: An observational time and motion study was conducted in 3 different urban, academic emergency departments with 18 attending emergency physicians. Each physician was observed for 2 hours, and the number of interruptions, source of interruptions, type of task being interrupted, and use of interruption management strategies were documented. RESULTS:Participants were interrupted on average of 12.5 times per hour. The majority of interruptions were in person from other staff, including nurses, residents, and other attending physicians. When participants were interrupted, they were often working on their computer. Participants almost always immediately engaged the interruption task (75.4% of the time), followed by multitasking, in which the primary task was continued while the interrupting task was performed (22.2%). Physicians rejected or delayed interruptions less than 2% of the time. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest there is an opportunity to introduce emergency physicians to the use of interruption management strategies as a method of handling the frequent interruptions they are exposed to. Use of these strategies when high-risk primary tasks are performed may reduce the disruptiveness of some interruptions and improve patient safety.
Authors: Sarah M Greenberger; John T Finnell; Bernard P Chang; Nidhi Garg; Shawn M Quinn; Steven Bird; Deborah B Diercks; Christopher I Doty; Fiona E Gallahue; Maria E Moreira; Megan L Ranney; Loren Rives; Chad S Kessler; Bruce Lo; Gillian Schmitz Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2020-01-19
Authors: Emilie Fortman; A Zachary Hettinger; Jessica L Howe; Allan Fong; Zoe Pruitt; Kristen Miller; Raj M Ratwani Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Tracy A Lieu; E Margaret Warton; Jeffrey A East; Mark F Moeller; Stephanie Prausnitz; Manuel Ballesca; Gloria Mark; Fatema Akbar; Sameer Awsare; Yi-Fen Irene Chen; Mary E Reed Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-01-04