Chad M Hodge1,2, Scott P Narus1,2. 1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 2. Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Abstract
Objective: Problem list data is a driving force for many beneficial clinical tools, yet these data remain underutilized. We performed a systematic literature review, pulling insights from previous research, aggregating insights into themes, and distilling themes into actionable advice. We sought to learn what changes we could make to existing applications, to the clinical workflow, and to clinicians' perceptions that would improve problem list utilization and increase the prevalence of problems data in the electronic medical record. Materials and Methods: We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to systematically curate a corpus of pertinent articles. We performed a thematic analysis, looking for interesting excerpts and ideas. By aggregating excerpts from many authors, we gained broader, more inclusive insights into what makes a good problem list and what factors are conducive to its success. Results: Analysis led to a list of 7 benefits of using the problem list, 15 aspects critical to problem list success, and knowledge to help inform policy development, such as consensus on what belongs on the problem list, who should maintain the problem list, and when. Conclusions: A list of suggestions is made on ways in which the problem list can be improved to increase utilization by clinicians. There is also a need for standard measurements of the problem list, so that lists can be measured, compared, and discussed with rigor and a common vocabulary.
Objective: Problem list data is a driving force for many beneficial clinical tools, yet these data remain underutilized. We performed a systematic literature review, pulling insights from previous research, aggregating insights into themes, and distilling themes into actionable advice. We sought to learn what changes we could make to existing applications, to the clinical workflow, and to clinicians' perceptions that would improve problem list utilization and increase the prevalence of problems data in the electronic medical record. Materials and Methods: We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to systematically curate a corpus of pertinent articles. We performed a thematic analysis, looking for interesting excerpts and ideas. By aggregating excerpts from many authors, we gained broader, more inclusive insights into what makes a good problem list and what factors are conducive to its success. Results: Analysis led to a list of 7 benefits of using the problem list, 15 aspects critical to problem list success, and knowledge to help inform policy development, such as consensus on what belongs on the problem list, who should maintain the problem list, and when. Conclusions: A list of suggestions is made on ways in which the problem list can be improved to increase utilization by clinicians. There is also a need for standard measurements of the problem list, so that lists can be measured, compared, and discussed with rigor and a common vocabulary.
Authors: Bat-Zion Hose; Peter L T Hoonakker; Abigail R Wooldridge; Thomas B Brazelton Iii; Shannon M Dean; Ben Eithun; James C Fackler; Ayse P Gurses; Michelle M Kelly; Jonathan E Kohler; Nicolette M McGeorge; Joshua C Ross; Deborah A Rusy; Pascale Carayon Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Robert W Voss; Teresa D Schmidt; Nicole Weiskopf; Miguel Marino; David A Dorr; Nathalie Huguet; Nate Warren; Steele Valenzuela; Jean O'Malley; Ana R Quiñones Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 4.497