PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14633934

Computerized physician order entry: helpful or harmful?

Abstract

Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) is touted as a major improvement in patient safety, primarily as a result of the Institute of Medicine's 1999 report on medical errors and the subsequent formation of the "Leapfrog Group" of companies to preferentially direct their employees' health care to those institutions that install such systems (as part of directives that "Leapfrog" feels will improve patient care). Although the literature suggests that such systems have the potential to improve patient outcomes through decrease of adverse drug events, actual improvements in medical outcomes have not been documented. Installation of such systems could actually increase the number of adverse drug events and result in higher overall medical costs, particularly in the first few years of their adoption.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert G Berger, J P Kichak. 2003-11-21. Computerized physician order entry: helpful or harmful?. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.m1411

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessing medication prescribing errors in pediatric intensive care units.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a matrix for determining the predominant type, cause category, and rate of medication prescribing errors, and to explore the effectiveness of hospital-based improvement initiatives among pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). DESIGN: This study involved the prospective identification of medication errors for categorization and evaluation by using a matrix methodology. A pretest-posttest design without a control group was used to explore the impact of initiatives employed to reduce medication error rates and severity. SETTING: PICUs in nine freestanding, collaborating tertiary care children's hospitals that participated in both baseline and postintervention analyses. METHODS: We evaluated 12,026 PICU medication orders at baseline and 9,187 orders postintervention for prescribing errors, excluding resuscitation orders. A standardized tool and process captured error type, cause category, and severity for 2 wks before and after intervention. Three levels of error detection were used and included pharmacy order entry, PICU nurse order transcription, and team-based overview. Site-specific interventions were implemented, which included predominantly provider education as well as informational (47%) and dosing "assists" via preprinted orders, forcing functions, or prompts (39%). RESULTS: Of baseline orders, 11.1% had at least one prescribing error. The interception of prescribing errors improved 30.9% (1.6% of all orders at baseline, 2.0% post intervention). Preventable adverse drug events were uncommon (0.6% of all medication errors) and of low severity at baseline; most were wrong dose errors. The implementation of improvement initiatives, specific for each facility, resulted in a 31.6% reduction in prescribing errors from 11.1% to 7.6%. However, site results varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: A benchmark for medication prescribing errors in the PICU was identified among nine children's hospitals. The methodology was successful in accounting for site-specific differences with regard to identifying and documenting errors as well as reporting results of improvement initiatives. Furthermore, the methodology employed was generalizable in the identification of predominant prescribing error types, which helped to track individual hospital improvement initiative development and implementation. Overall improvement in prescribing error rates was noted; however, considerable variation in the success of improvement initiatives was noted and bears further attention.

Drug Therapy, Computer-Assisted↗

Impact of emerging technologies on medication errors and adverse drug events.

Published evidence on the effects of computerized physician order entry (CPOE), automated dispensing machines (ADMs), bar coding, and computerized medication administration records (CMARs) on medication errors and adverse drug events (ADEs) were reviewed. Emerging technologies have been recommended as potential mechanisms for reducing medication errors. Critical evaluations of the impact of these new technologies on medication errors and other adverse outcomes are lacking. PubMed was searched to identify all peer-reviewed publications linking four technologies (CPOE, ADMs, bar coding, and CMARs) with reductions in medication errors and ADEs and secondary endpoints. All controlled studies that assessed the impact of the technologies were evaluated. The appropriateness of the use of these technologies was also examined. Few studies were identified that evaluated the technologies' impact on these endpoints. Of the evaluated technologies, CPOE was the most studied; however, investigations were limited to selected medical centers. The appropriateness of use of the technologies was evaluated even more infrequently. A literature review revealed a paucity of controlled, generalizable studies confirming the benefits of technologies intended to reduce medication errors and ADEs. Very little evidence on the appropriateness of the use of these technologies was found.

Drug Therapy, Computer-Assisted↗