Process Level Benefits of an Electronic Medical Records System

Author(s):  
Abirami Radhakrishnan ◽  
Dessa David ◽  
Jigish Zaveri

The challenges faced by U.S. health care system are vividly explained in the U.S. Government’s health information technology plan, The U.S. health care system faces major challenges. Health care spending and health insurance premiums continue to rise at rates much higher than the rate of inflation. Despite spending over $1.6 trillion on health care, there are still serious concerns about preventable errors, uneven health care quality, and poor communication among doctors, hospitals, and many other health care providers involved in the care of any one person. The Institute of Medicine estimates that between 44,000 and 98,000 Americans die each year from medical errors. Many more die or have permanent disability because of inappropriate treatments, mistreatments, or missed treatments in ambulatory settings. It has been found that as much as $300 billion is spent each year on health care that does not improve patient outcomes – treatment that is unnecessary, inappropriate, inefficient, or ineffective. All these problems – high costs, uncertain value, medical errors, variable quality, administrative inefficiencies, and poor coordination – are closely connected to inadequate use of health care information technology. (U.S. Federal Government Health Information Technology Plan, 2004).

2011 ◽  
pp. 393-401
Author(s):  
Abirami Radhakrishnan ◽  
Dessa David ◽  
Jigish Zaveri

The challenges faced by U.S. health care system are vividly explained in the U.S. Government’s health information technology plan, The U.S. health care system faces major challenges. Health care spending and health insurance premiums continue to rise at rates much higher than the rate of inflation. Despite spending over $1.6 trillion on health care, there are still serious concerns about preventable errors, uneven health care quality, and poor communication among doctors, hospitals, and many other health care providers involved in the care of any one person. The Institute of Medicine estimates that between 44,000 and 98,000 Americans die each year from medical errors. Many more die or have permanent disability because of inappropriate treatments, mistreatments, or missed treatments in ambulatory settings. It has been found that as much as $300 billion is spent each year on health care that does not improve patient outcomes – treatment that is unnecessary, inappropriate, inefficient, or ineffective. All these problems – high costs, uncertain value, medical errors, variable quality, administrative inefficiencies, and poor coordination – are closely connected to inadequate use of health care information technology. (U.S. Federal Government Health Information Technology Plan, 2004).


1999 ◽  
Vol 25 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 387-402
Author(s):  
Arti K. Rai

Over the last few decades, the U.S. health care system has been the beneficiary of tremendous growth in the power and sheer quantity of useful medical technology. As a consequence, our society has, for some time, had to make cost-benefit tradeoffs in health care. The alternative—funding all health care interventions that would produce some health benefit for some patient—is not feasible, because it would effectively consume all of our resources.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e421-e427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Luck ◽  
Laura S. York ◽  
Candice Bowman ◽  
Randall C. Gale ◽  
Nina Smith ◽  
...  

A combination of user-driven tool creation and centralized toolkit development seems to be effective for leveraging health information technology to spread disease-specific quality improvement tools within an integrated health care system.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theophile Ndabu ◽  
Pavankumar Mulgund ◽  
Raj Sharman ◽  
Ranjit Singh

BACKGROUND Health information technology (HIT) has been widely adopted in hospital settings, contributing to improved patient safety. However, many types of medical errors attributable to information technology (IT) have negatively impacted patient safety. The continued occurrence of many errors is a reminder that HIT software testing and validation is not adequate in ensuring errorless software functioning within the health care organization. OBJECTIVE This pilot study aims to classify technology-related medical errors in a hospital setting using an expanded version of the sociotechnical framework to understand the significant differences in the perceptions of clinical and technology stakeholders regarding the potential causes of these errors. The paper also provides some recommendations to prevent future errors. METHODS Medical errors were collected from previous studies identified in leading health databases. From the main list, we selected errors that occurred in hospital settings. Semistructured interviews with 5 medical and 6 IT professionals were conducted to map the events on different dimensions of the expanded sociotechnical framework. RESULTS Of the 2319 identified publications, 36 were included in the review. Of the 67 errors collected, 12 occurred in hospital settings. The classification showed the “gulf” that exists between IT and medical professionals in their perspectives on the underlying causes of medical errors. IT experts consider technology as the source of most errors and suggest solutions that are mostly technical. However, clinicians assigned the source of errors within the people, process, and contextual dimensions. For example, for the error “Copied and pasted charting in the wrong window: Before, you could not easily get into someone else’s chart accidentally...because you would have to pull the chart and open it,” medical experts highlighted contextual issues, including the number of patients a health care provider sees in a short time frame, unfamiliarity with a new electronic medical record system, nurse transitions around the time of error, and confusion due to patients having the same name. They emphasized process controls, including failure modes, as a potential fix. Technology experts, in contrast, discussed the lack of notification, poor user interface, and lack of end-user training as critical factors for this error. CONCLUSIONS Knowledge of the dimensions of the sociotechnical framework and their interplay with other dimensions can guide the choice of ways to address medical errors. These findings lead us to conclude that designers need not only a high degree of HIT know-how but also a strong understanding of the medical processes and contextual factors. Although software development teams have historically included clinicians as business analysts or subject matter experts to bridge the gap, development teams will be better served by more immersive exposure to clinical environments, leading to better software design and implementation, and ultimately to enhanced patient safety.


10.2196/21884 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e21884
Author(s):  
Theophile Ndabu ◽  
Pavankumar Mulgund ◽  
Raj Sharman ◽  
Ranjit Singh

Background Health information technology (HIT) has been widely adopted in hospital settings, contributing to improved patient safety. However, many types of medical errors attributable to information technology (IT) have negatively impacted patient safety. The continued occurrence of many errors is a reminder that HIT software testing and validation is not adequate in ensuring errorless software functioning within the health care organization. Objective This pilot study aims to classify technology-related medical errors in a hospital setting using an expanded version of the sociotechnical framework to understand the significant differences in the perceptions of clinical and technology stakeholders regarding the potential causes of these errors. The paper also provides some recommendations to prevent future errors. Methods Medical errors were collected from previous studies identified in leading health databases. From the main list, we selected errors that occurred in hospital settings. Semistructured interviews with 5 medical and 6 IT professionals were conducted to map the events on different dimensions of the expanded sociotechnical framework. Results Of the 2319 identified publications, 36 were included in the review. Of the 67 errors collected, 12 occurred in hospital settings. The classification showed the “gulf” that exists between IT and medical professionals in their perspectives on the underlying causes of medical errors. IT experts consider technology as the source of most errors and suggest solutions that are mostly technical. However, clinicians assigned the source of errors within the people, process, and contextual dimensions. For example, for the error “Copied and pasted charting in the wrong window: Before, you could not easily get into someone else’s chart accidentally...because you would have to pull the chart and open it,” medical experts highlighted contextual issues, including the number of patients a health care provider sees in a short time frame, unfamiliarity with a new electronic medical record system, nurse transitions around the time of error, and confusion due to patients having the same name. They emphasized process controls, including failure modes, as a potential fix. Technology experts, in contrast, discussed the lack of notification, poor user interface, and lack of end-user training as critical factors for this error. Conclusions Knowledge of the dimensions of the sociotechnical framework and their interplay with other dimensions can guide the choice of ways to address medical errors. These findings lead us to conclude that designers need not only a high degree of HIT know-how but also a strong understanding of the medical processes and contextual factors. Although software development teams have historically included clinicians as business analysts or subject matter experts to bridge the gap, development teams will be better served by more immersive exposure to clinical environments, leading to better software design and implementation, and ultimately to enhanced patient safety.


2007 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 18
Author(s):  
KEVIN GRUMBACH ◽  
ROBERT MOFFIT

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document