PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Medical Order Entry Systems”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources

The pharmacy computer system at the New England Medical Center.

The pharmacy computer system developed and implemented at the New England Medical Center (NEMC) is described. The system was developed to improve the department's fiscal performance and operations. It operates on NEMC's large mainframe system and has the following components-order entry, unit dose/patient profile, i.v. admixture, and financial/management. The system was designed to interface with the admissions and census system and use the pharmacy department's drug data file. It accepts medication orders from pharmacy satellites and then processes the orders according to the requirements for the i.v. admixture or unit dose procedures. Financial data are collected as a routine part of all medication order processing. The system allows for the entry of multiple medication orders on one cathode ray tube (CRT) screen, thus facilitating order entry. The use of programmed system defaults is described. Order entry, dose selection, and patient profiles are displayed on a CRT. An active order list is printed once daily at midnight to serve as a back-up for the system. The computer system has had a positive impact on the department's operational, clinical, and management functions. Future enhancements of the NEMC system are discussed.

Allied Health Personnel↗

Nurse's role in tracking adverse drug events: the impact of provider order entry.

Adverse drug events (ADE), or injuries caused by drug therapy, are a frequent and serious problem in hospitalized patients. Monitoring, preventing, and treating ADEs is an important patient safety function. Nurses play a significant role in this function, because their data is a unique and important indicator of ADEs and because they are the final point of medication administration. New provider order entry systems with electronic medical records have been viewed as an effective innovation and solution to high rates of ADEs. These systems increase legibility of drug orders, provide decision support, and increase access to the medical record. However, they may not interface with nursing processes effectively. This study reports the experience of a team conducting an ADE surveillance study in a Veterans Health Administration setting where extensive computerized innovations are in place. Lessons learned regarding the integration of nursing work processes with the computerized setting are described. Three areas of concern are highlighted: decreased access to nursing narratives, lack of decision support for medication administration, and failure to code nursing data. Each of these is discussed in terms of relevance to patient safety and the design of information systems.

Female↗

Static workflow.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Clinical Competence↗

Integrating "best of care" protocols into clinicians' workflow via care provider order entry: impact on quality-of-care indicators for acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: In the context of an inpatient care provider order entry (CPOE) system, to evaluate the impact of a decision support tool on integration of cardiology "best of care" order sets into clinicians' admission workflow, and on quality measures for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. DESIGN: A before-and-after study of physician orders evaluated (1) per-patient use rates of standardized acute coronary syndrome (ACS) order set and (2) patient-level compliance with two individual recommendations: early aspirin ordering and beta-blocker ordering. MEASUREMENTS: The effectiveness of the intervention was evaluated for (1) all patients with ACS (suspected for AMI at the time of admission) (N = 540) and (2) the subset of the ACS patients with confirmed discharge diagnosis of AMI (n = 180) who comprise the recommended target population who should receive aspirin and/or beta-blockers. Compliance rates for use of the ACS order set, aspirin ordering, and beta-blocker ordering were calculated as the percentages of patients who had each action performed within 24 hours of admission. RESULTS: For all ACS admissions, the decision support tool significantly increased use of the ACS order set (p = 0.009). Use of the ACS order set led, within the first 24 hours of hospitalization, to a significant increase in the number of patients who received aspirin (p = 0.001) and a nonsignificant increase in the number of patients who received beta-blockers (p = 0.07). Results for confirmed AMI cases demonstrated similar increases, but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The decision support tool increased optional use of the ACS order set, but room for additional improvement exists.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

Evaluation and certification of computerized provider order entry systems.

Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) is an application that is used to electronically write physician orders either in the hospital or in the outpatient setting. It is used in about 15% of U.S. Hospitals and a smaller percentage of ambulatory clinics. It is linked with clinical decision support, which provides much of the value of implementing it. A number of studies have assessed the impact of CPOE with respect to a variety of parameters, including costs of care, medication safety, use of guidelines or protocols, and other measures of the effectiveness or quality of care. Most of these studies have been undertaken at CPOE exemplar sites with homegrown clinical information systems. With the increasing implementation of commercial CPOE systems in various settings of care has come evidence that some implementation approaches may not achieve previously published results or may actually cause new errors or even harm. This has lead to new initiatives to evaluate CPOE systems, which have been undertaken by both vendors and other groups who evaluate vendors, focused on CPOE vendor capabilities and effective approaches to implementation that can achieve benefits seen in published studies. In addition, an electronic health record (EHR) vendor certification process is ongoing under the province of the Certification Commission for Health Information Technology (CCHIT) (which includes CPOE) that will affect the purchase and use of these applications by hospitals and clinics and their participation in public and private health insurance programs. Large employers have also joined this focus by developing flight simulation tools to evaluate the capabilities of these CPOE systems once implemented, potentially linking the results of such programs to reimbursement through pay for performance programs. The increasing role of CPOE systems in health care has invited much more scrutiny about the effectiveness of these systems in actual practice which has the potential to improve their ultimate performance.

Certification↗

The long road to patient safety: a status report on patient safety systems.

CONTEXT: Since the Institute of Medicine (IOM) reports on medical errors and quality, national attention has focused on improving patient safety through changes in "systems" of care. These reports resulted in a new paradigm that, rather than centering on individual errors, focuses on the "systems" necessary to facilitate and enhance quality and protect patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess the status of hospital patient safety systems since the release of the IOM reports and to identify changes over time in 2 states that collaborated on a patient safety project funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Survey of all acute care hospitals in Missouri and Utah at 2 points in time, in 2002 and 2004, using a 91-item comprehensive questionnaire (n = 126 for survey 1 and n = 128 for survey 2). To assess changes over time, we also studied the cohort of 107 hospitals that responded to both surveys. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses to the 91-question survey as well as changes in responses to the survey questions over an 18-month period. Seven latent variables were constructed to represent the most important patient safety constructs studied: computerized physician order entry systems, computerized test results, and assessments of adverse events; specific patient safety policies; use of data in patient safety programs; drug storage, administration, and safety procedures; manner of handling adverse event/error reporting; prevention policies; and root cause analysis. For each hospital, the 7 latent variables were summed to give an overall measure of the patient safety status of the hospital. RESULTS: Development and implementation of patient safety systems is at best modest. Self-reported regression in patient safety systems was also found. While 74% of hospitals reported full implementation of a written patient safety plan, nearly 9% reported no plan. The area of surgery appears to have the greatest level of patient safety systems. Other areas, such as medications, with a long history of efforts in patient safety and error prevention, showed improvements, but the percentage of hospitals with various safety systems was already high at baseline for many systems. Some findings are surprising, given the overall trends; for example, while a substantial percentage of hospitals have medication safety systems, only 34.1% [corrected] reported full implementation at survey 2 of computerized physician order entry systems for medications, despite the growth of computer technology in general and in hospital billing systems in particular. CONCLUSIONS: The current status of hospital patient safety systems is not close to meeting IOM recommendations. Data are consistent with recent reports that patient safety system progress is slow and is a cause for great concern. Efforts for improvement must be accelerated.

Hospital Administration↗

ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in acute care settings: dispensing and administration--1999.

Results of the 1999 ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in acute care settings that pertain to drug dispensing and administration practices are presented. Pharmacy directors at 1050 general and children's medical-surgical hospitals in the United States were surveyed by mail. The response rate was 51%. About three-fourths of respondents described their inpatient pharmacy's distribution system as centralized. Of those with centralized distribution, 77.4% indicated that their system was not automated. Decentralized pharmacists were used in 29.4% of the hospitals surveyed; an average of 58.9% of their time was spent on clinical, as opposed to distributive, activities. About 67% of directors reported pharmacy computer access to hospital laboratory data, 38% reported access to automated medication-dispensing-unit data, and 19% reported computer access to hospital outpatient affiliates. Only 13% of hospitals had an electronic medication order-entry system; another 27% reported they were in the process of developing such a system. Decentralized medication storage and distribution devices were used in 49.2% of hospitals, while 7.3% used bedside information systems for medication management. Machine-readable coding was used for inpatient pharmacy dispensing by 8.2% of hospitals. Ninety percent reported a formal, systemwide committee responsible for data collection, review, and evaluation of medication errors. Virtually all respondents (98.7%) reported that their staff initiated manual reports. Only two thirds tracked these reports and reported trends to the staff. Fewer than 15% reported that staff were penalized for making or contributing to an error. Pharmacists are making a significant contribution to the safety of medication distribution and administration. The increased use of technology to improve efficiency and reduce costs will require that pharmacists continue to focus on the impact of changes on the safety of the medication-use system.

Ambulatory Care↗

When requests become orders--a formative investigation into the impact of a computerized physician order entry system on a pathology laboratory service.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify the key implications of the implementation of a computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system on pathology laboratory services. METHODS: An in-depth qualitative study using observation, focus groups and interviews with pathology staff, managers, clinicians and information systems staff during implementation of a CPOE system in 2004 at a major Australian teaching hospital. RESULTS: Pathology laboratories experienced a shift in their work roles resulting in altered work practices, responsibilities and procedures. These changes were marked by terminological and procedural changes in the test order process from when clinicians issued a request for a test, to the new system that established clinical orders at the point of care. This change was accompanied by some organizational dysfunctions including the emergence of a new category of "frustrated" orders without specimens; problems with the procedure of adding tests to previously existing specimens; the appearance of discrepancies in the recorded time of specimen collection. In response to these changes, hospital and pathology staff adopted a variety of means to cope with their changed circumstances. These ranged from efforts to increase clinical awareness to compensatory laboratory workarounds and enforced rule changes. CONCLUSIONS: CPOE systems can have a major impact on the nature of the work of pathology laboratories. Understanding how and why these changes occur can be enhanced through considering the organizational and social contexts involved. The effectiveness of CPOE systems will rely on how administrators and staff approach and deal with these challenges.

Clinical Laboratory Information Systems↗

Computerized provider order entry in the emergency department: pilot evaluation of a return on investment analysis instrument.

The Vanderbilt Center for Better Health conducted a workflow analysis study to determine the benefits of implementing a computerized provider order entry system in the adult Emergency Department. Time savings by role was 1619 hours/year for nurses, 815 for medical receptionist, -95 for attendings, and -100 for residents. Translating time savings into bottom line savings (FTE/overtime reduction, additional charges) resulted in $31,424 in time savings and $40,000 cost savings (paper forms).

Adult↗

Usage of CPOE steadily increasing, leapfrog says.

By the end of 2006, about 10% of all hospitals will have completed CPOE implementation. Few statistically significant organizational factors were correlated to the variability in CPOE implementation. P4P will help implementation rate, but high cost of systems will remain a barrier.

Diffusion of Innovation↗

Computerized provider order entry implementation: no association with increased mortality rates in an intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine if there were any changes in risk-adjusted mortality after the implementation of a computerized provider order entry system in our PICU. METHODS: Study was undertaken in a tertiary care PICU with 20 beds and 1100 annual admissions. Demographic, admission source, primary diagnosis, crude mortality, and Pediatric Risk of Mortality III risk-adjusted mortality were abstracted retrospectively on all admissions from the PICUEs database for the period October 1, 2002, to December 31, 2004. This time period reflects the 13 months before and 13 months after computerized provider order entry implementation. Pediatric Risk of Mortality III mortality risk adjustment was used to determine standardized mortality ratios. RESULTS: During the study period, 2533 patients were admitted to the PICU, of which 284 were transported from another facility. The 13-month preimplementation mortality rate was 4.22%, and the 13-month postimplementation mortality rate was 3.46%, representing a nonsignificant reduction in the risk of mortality in the postimplementation period. The standardized mortality ratio was 0.98 vs 0.77, respectively, and the mortality rate for the transported patients was 9.6% vs 6.29%. This yields a nonsignificant mortality risk reduction in the postimplementation period. The standardized mortality ratio was 1.10 preimplementation versus 0.70 postimplementation. Analysis of the 13-month preimplementation versus 5-month postimplementation periods showed a non-statistically significant trend in reduction of mortality for all PICU patients and for transported patients. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a computerized provider order entry system, even in the early months after implementation, was not associated with an increase in mortality. Our experience suggests that careful design, build, implementation, and support can mitigate the risk of implementing new technology even in an ICU setting.

Child↗