OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of the introduction of new pre-written orders for antimicrobials in a computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system on 1) accuracy of documented indications for antimicrobials in the CPOE system, 2) appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing, and 3) compliance with the hospital's antimicrobial policy. Prescriber opinions of the new decision support were also explored to determine why the redesign was effective or ineffective in altering prescribing practices. METHODS: The study comprised two parts: a controlled pre-post study and qualitative interviews. The intervention involved the redesign of pre-written orders for half the antimicrobials so that approved indications were incorporated into pre-written orders. 555 antimicrobials prescribed before (September - October, 2013) and 534 antimicrobials prescribed after (March - April, 2015) the intervention on all general wards of a hospital were audited by study pharmacists. Eleven prescribers participated in semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Redesign of computerized decision support did not result in more appropriate or compliant antimicrobial prescribing, nor did it improve accuracy of indication documentation in the CPOE system (Intervention antimicrobials: appropriateness 49% vs. 50%; compliance 44% vs. 42%; accuracy 58% vs. 38%; all p>0.05). Via our interviews with prescribers we identified five main reasons for this, primarily that indications entered into the CPOE system were not monitored or followed-up, and that the antimicrobial approval process did not align well with prescriber workflow. CONCLUSION: Redesign of pre-written orders to incorporate appropriate indications did not improve antimicrobial prescribing. Workarounds are likely when compliance with hospital policy creates additional work for prescribers or when system usability is poor. Implementation of IT, in the absence of support or follow-up, is unlikely to achieve all anticipated benefits.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of the introduction of new pre-written orders for antimicrobials in a computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system on 1) accuracy of documented indications for antimicrobials in the CPOE system, 2) appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing, and 3) compliance with the hospital's antimicrobial policy. Prescriber opinions of the new decision support were also explored to determine why the redesign was effective or ineffective in altering prescribing practices. METHODS: The study comprised two parts: a controlled pre-post study and qualitative interviews. The intervention involved the redesign of pre-written orders for half the antimicrobials so that approved indications were incorporated into pre-written orders. 555 antimicrobials prescribed before (September - October, 2013) and 534 antimicrobials prescribed after (March - April, 2015) the intervention on all general wards of a hospital were audited by study pharmacists. Eleven prescribers participated in semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Redesign of computerized decision support did not result in more appropriate or compliant antimicrobial prescribing, nor did it improve accuracy of indication documentation in the CPOE system (Intervention antimicrobials: appropriateness 49% vs. 50%; compliance 44% vs. 42%; accuracy 58% vs. 38%; all p>0.05). Via our interviews with prescribers we identified five main reasons for this, primarily that indications entered into the CPOE system were not monitored or followed-up, and that the antimicrobial approval process did not align well with prescriber workflow. CONCLUSION: Redesign of pre-written orders to incorporate appropriate indications did not improve antimicrobial prescribing. Workarounds are likely when compliance with hospital policy creates additional work for prescribers or when system usability is poor. Implementation of IT, in the absence of support or follow-up, is unlikely to achieve all anticipated benefits.
Keywords:
Alerting; Clinical decision support; Hospital information systems; Medication management; Order entry
Authors: Alireza Kazemi; Johan Ellenius; Faramarz Pourasghar; Shahram Tofighi; Aref Salehi; Ali Amanati; Uno G H Fors Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2009-07-17 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Melissa T Baysari; Johanna I Westbrook; Katrina L Richardson; Richard O Day Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kevin Haynes; Darren R Linkin; Neil O Fishman; Warren B Bilker; Brian L Strom; Eric A Pifer; Sean Hennessy Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: M T Baysari; K Oliver; B Egan; L Li; K Richardson; I Sandaradura; J I Westbrook; R O Day Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Steven W Thiel; Muhammad F Asghar; Scott T Micek; Richard M Reichley; Joshua A Doherty; Marin H Kollef Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Peter Davey; Erwin Brown; Esmita Charani; Lynda Fenelon; Ian M Gould; Alison Holmes; Craig R Ramsay; Philip J Wiffen; Mark Wilcox Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2013-04-30
Authors: Melissa T Baysari; Wu Yi Zheng; Ling Li; Johanna Westbrook; Richard O Day; Sarah Hilmer; Bethany Annemarie Van Dort; Andrew Hargreaves; Peter Kennedy; Corey Monaghan; Paula Doherty; Michael Draheim; Lucy Nair; Ruby Samson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-08-18 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Bethany A Van Dort; Jane E Carland; Jonathan Penm; Angus Ritchie; Melissa T Baysari Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2022-09-12 Impact factor: 7.942