Vimla L Patel1, Courtney A Denton1, Hiral C Soni2, Thomas G Kannampallil3, Stephen J Traub4, Jason S Shapiro5. 1. Cognitive Studies in Medicine and Public Health, The New York Academy of Medicine, New York, New York, United States. 2. Biomedical Informatics, College of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona, United States. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Institute for Informatics, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, United States. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, United States. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We characterize physician workflow in two distinctive emergency departments (ED). Physician practices mediated by electronic health records (EHR) are explored within the context of organizational complexity for the delivery of care. METHODS: Two urban clinical sites, including an academic teaching ED, were selected. Fourteen physicians were recruited. Overall, 62 hours of direct clinical observations were conducted characterizing clinical activities (EHR use, team communication, and patient care). Data were analyzed using qualitative open-coding techniques and descriptive statistics. Timeline belts were used to represent temporal events. RESULTS: At site 1, physicians, engaged in more team communication, followed by direct patient care. Although physicians spent 61% of their clinical time at workstations, only 25% was spent on the EHR, primarily for clinical documentation and review. Site 2 physicians engaged primarily in direct patient care spending 52% of their time at a workstation, and 31% dedicated to EHRs, focused on chart review. At site 1, physicians showed nonlinear complex workflow patterns with a greater frequency of multitasking and interruptions, resulting in workflow fragmentation. In comparison, at site 2, a less complex environment with a unique patient assignment system, resulting in a more linear workflow pattern. CONCLUSION: The nature of the clinical practice and EHR-mediated workflow reflects the ED work practices. Physicians in more complex organizations may be less efficient because of the fragmented workflow. However, these effects can be mitigated by effort distribution through team communication, which affords inherent safety checks. Thieme. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVES: We characterize physician workflow in two distinctive emergency departments (ED). Physician practices mediated by electronic health records (EHR) are explored within the context of organizational complexity for the delivery of care. METHODS: Two urban clinical sites, including an academic teaching ED, were selected. Fourteen physicians were recruited. Overall, 62 hours of direct clinical observations were conducted characterizing clinical activities (EHR use, team communication, and patient care). Data were analyzed using qualitative open-coding techniques and descriptive statistics. Timeline belts were used to represent temporal events. RESULTS: At site 1, physicians, engaged in more team communication, followed by direct patient care. Although physicians spent 61% of their clinical time at workstations, only 25% was spent on the EHR, primarily for clinical documentation and review. Site 2 physicians engaged primarily in direct patient care spending 52% of their time at a workstation, and 31% dedicated to EHRs, focused on chart review. At site 1, physicians showed nonlinear complex workflow patterns with a greater frequency of multitasking and interruptions, resulting in workflow fragmentation. In comparison, at site 2, a less complex environment with a unique patient assignment system, resulting in a more linear workflow pattern. CONCLUSION: The nature of the clinical practice and EHR-mediated workflow reflects the ED work practices. Physicians in more complex organizations may be less efficient because of the fragmented workflow. However, these effects can be mitigated by effort distribution through team communication, which affords inherent safety checks. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Authors: Kai Zheng; Hilary M Haftel; Ronald B Hirschl; Michael O'Reilly; David A Hanauer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: P M Neri; L Redden; S Poole; C N Pozner; J Horsky; A S Raja; E Poon; G Schiff; A Landman Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Courtney A Denton; Hiral C Soni; Thomas G Kannampallil; Anna Serrichio; Jason S Shapiro; Stephen J Traub; Vimla L Patel Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Lu Zheng; David R Kaufman; Benjamin J Duncan; Stephanie K Furniss; Adela Grando; Karl A Poterack; Timothy A Miksch; Richard A Helmers; Bradley N Doebbeling Journal: Comput Inform Nurs Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 1.985
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: Stephen J Traub; Adam C Bartley; Vernon D Smith; Roshanak Didehban; Christopher A Lipinski; Soroush Saghafian Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 1.484