Saif Khairat1, Cameron Coleman2, Thomas Newlin2, Victoria Rand2, Paige Ottmar3, Thomas Bice4, Shannon S Carson4. 1. Carolina Health Informatics Program and School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: Saif@unc.edu. 2. Carolina Health Informatics Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 3. Gilling's School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 4. Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor EHR design adds further challenges, especially in the areas of order entry and information visualization, with a net effect of increased rates of incidents, accidents, and mortality in ICU settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to propose a novel, mixed-methods framework to understand EHR-related information overload by identifying and characterizing areas of suboptimal usability and clinician frustration within a vendor-based, provider-facing EHR interface. METHODS: A mixed-methods, live observational usability study was conducted at a single, large, tertiary academic medical center in the Southeastern US utilizing a commercial, vendor based EHR. Physicians were asked to complete usability patient cases, provide responses to three surveys, and participant in a semi-structured interview. RESULTS: Of the 25 enrolled ICU physician participants, there were 5(20%) attending physicians, 9 (36%) fellows, and 11 (44%) residents; 52% of participants were females. On average, residents were the quickest in completing the tasks while attending physician took the longest to complete the same task. Poor usability, complex interface screens, and difficulty to navigate the EHR significantly correlated with high frustration levels. Significant association were found between the occurrence of error messages and temporal demand such that more error messages resulted in longer completion time (p = .03). DISCUSSION: Physicians remain frustrated with the EHR due to difficulty in finding patient information. EHR usability remains a critical challenge in healthcare, with implications for medical errors, patient safety, and clinician burnout. There is a need for scientific findings on current information needs and ways to improve EHR-related information overload.
BACKGROUND: Poor EHR design adds further challenges, especially in the areas of order entry and information visualization, with a net effect of increased rates of incidents, accidents, and mortality in ICU settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to propose a novel, mixed-methods framework to understand EHR-related information overload by identifying and characterizing areas of suboptimal usability and clinician frustration within a vendor-based, provider-facing EHR interface. METHODS: A mixed-methods, live observational usability study was conducted at a single, large, tertiary academic medical center in the Southeastern US utilizing a commercial, vendor based EHR. Physicians were asked to complete usability patient cases, provide responses to three surveys, and participant in a semi-structured interview. RESULTS: Of the 25 enrolled ICU physician participants, there were 5(20%) attending physicians, 9 (36%) fellows, and 11 (44%) residents; 52% of participants were females. On average, residents were the quickest in completing the tasks while attending physician took the longest to complete the same task. Poor usability, complex interface screens, and difficulty to navigate the EHR significantly correlated with high frustration levels. Significant association were found between the occurrence of error messages and temporal demand such that more error messages resulted in longer completion time (p = .03). DISCUSSION: Physicians remain frustrated with the EHR due to difficulty in finding patient information. EHR usability remains a critical challenge in healthcare, with implications for medical errors, patient safety, and clinician burnout. There is a need for scientific findings on current information needs and ways to improve EHR-related information overload.
Authors: Juliana J Brixey; Zhihua Tang; David J Robinson; Craig W Johnson; Todd R Johnson; James P Turley; Vimla L Patel; Jiajie Zhang Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2007-06-14 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Bhishamjit S Chera; Lukasz Mazur; Marianne Jackson; Kinely Taylor; Prithima Mosaly; Sha Chang; Kathy Deschesne; Dana LaChapelle; Lesley Hoyle; Patricia Saponaro; John Rockwell; Robert Adams; Lawrence B Marks Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2013-06-29
Authors: Christopher A March; David Steiger; Gretchen Scholl; Vishnu Mohan; William R Hersh; Jeffrey A Gold Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Saif Khairat; Cameron Coleman; Paige Ottmar; Thomas Bice; Ross Koppel; Shannon S Carson Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Oliver T Nguyen; Nyasia J Jenkins; Neel Khanna; Shivani Shah; Alexander J Gartland; Kea Turner; Lisa J Merlo Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: John H Holmes; James Beinlich; Mary R Boland; Kathryn H Bowles; Yong Chen; Tessa S Cook; George Demiris; Michael Draugelis; Laura Fluharty; Peter E Gabriel; Robert Grundmeier; C William Hanson; Daniel S Herman; Blanca E Himes; Rebecca A Hubbard; Charles E Kahn; Dokyoon Kim; Ross Koppel; Qi Long; Nebojsa Mirkovic; Jeffrey S Morris; Danielle L Mowery; Marylyn D Ritchie; Ryan Urbanowicz; Jason H Moore Journal: Methods Inf Med Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 1.800
Authors: Michael G Semanik; Peter C Kleinschmidt; Adam Wright; Duwayne L Willett; Shannon M Dean; Sameh N Saleh; Zoe Co; Emmanuel Sampene; Joel R Buchanan Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 4.497