OBJECTIVE: A research prototype Physician Workstation (PWS) incorporating a graphical user interface and a drug ordering module was compared with the existing hospital information system in an academic Veterans Administration General Medical Clinic. Physicians in the intervention group received recommendations for drug substitutions to reduce costs and were alerted to potential drug interactions. The objective was to evaluate the effect of the PWS on user satisfaction, on health-related outcomes, and on costs. DESIGN: A one-year, two-period, randomized controlled trial with 37 subjects. MEASUREMENTS: Differences in the reliance on noncomputer sources of information, in user satisfaction, in the cost of prescribed medications, and in the rate of clinically relevant drug interactions were assessed. RESULTS: The study subjects logged onto the workstation an average of 6.53 times per provider and used it to generate 2.8% of prescriptions during the intervention period. On a five-point scale (5 = very satisfied, 1 = very dissatisfied), user satisfaction declined in the PWS group (3.44 to 2.98 p = 0.008), and increased in the control group (3.23 to 3.72, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The intervention physicians did not use the PWS frequently enough to influence information-seeking behavior, health outcomes, or cost. The study design did not determine whether the poor usage resulted from satisfaction with the control system, problems using the PWS intervention, or the functions provided by the PWS intervention. Evaluative studies should include provisions to improve the chance of successful implementation as well as to yield maximum information if a negative study occurs.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: A research prototype Physician Workstation (PWS) incorporating a graphical user interface and a drug ordering module was compared with the existing hospital information system in an academic Veterans Administration General Medical Clinic. Physicians in the intervention group received recommendations for drug substitutions to reduce costs and were alerted to potential drug interactions. The objective was to evaluate the effect of the PWS on user satisfaction, on health-related outcomes, and on costs. DESIGN: A one-year, two-period, randomized controlled trial with 37 subjects. MEASUREMENTS: Differences in the reliance on noncomputer sources of information, in user satisfaction, in the cost of prescribed medications, and in the rate of clinically relevant drug interactions were assessed. RESULTS: The study subjects logged onto the workstation an average of 6.53 times per provider and used it to generate 2.8% of prescriptions during the intervention period. On a five-point scale (5 = very satisfied, 1 = very dissatisfied), user satisfaction declined in the PWS group (3.44 to 2.98 p = 0.008), and increased in the control group (3.23 to 3.72, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The intervention physicians did not use the PWS frequently enough to influence information-seeking behavior, health outcomes, or cost. The study design did not determine whether the poor usage resulted from satisfaction with the control system, problems using the PWS intervention, or the functions provided by the PWS intervention. Evaluative studies should include provisions to improve the chance of successful implementation as well as to yield maximum information if a negative study occurs.
Authors: Emily Beth Devine; Ryan N Hansen; Jennifer L Wilson-Norton; N M Lawless; Albert W Fisk; David K Blough; Diane P Martin; Sean D Sullivan Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Annette Moxey; Jane Robertson; David Newby; Isla Hains; Margaret Williamson; Sallie-Anne Pearson Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.497