Problem list completeness in electronic health records: A multi-site study and assessment of success factors.

OBJECTIVE: To assess problem list completeness using an objective measure across a range of sites, and to identify success factors for problem list completeness. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data and interviews at ten healthcare organizations within the United States, United Kingdom, and Argentina who use a variety of electronic health record systems: four self-developed and six commercial. At each site, we assessed the proportion of patients who have diabetes recorded on their problem list out of all patients with a hemoglobin A1c elevation>=7.0%, which is diagnostic of diabetes. We then conducted interviews with informatics leaders at the four highest performing sites to determine factors associated with success. Finally, we surveyed all the sites about common practices implemented at the top performing sites to determine whether there was an association between problem list management practices and problem list completeness. RESULTS: Problem list completeness across the ten sites ranged from 60.2% to 99.4%, with a mean of 78.2%. Financial incentives, problem-oriented charting, gap reporting, shared responsibility, links to billing codes, and organizational culture were identified as success factors at the four hospitals with problem list completeness at or near 90.0%. DISCUSSION: Incomplete problem lists represent a global data integrity problem that could compromise quality of care and put patients at risk. There was a wide range of problem list completeness across the healthcare facilities. Nevertheless, some facilities have achieved high levels of problem list completeness, and it is important to better understand the factors that contribute to success to improve patient safety. CONCLUSION: Problem list completeness varies substantially across healthcare facilities. In our review of EHR systems at ten healthcare facilities, we identified six success factors which may be useful for healthcare organizations seeking to improve the quality of their problem list documentation: financial incentives, problem oriented charting, gap reporting, shared responsibility, links to billing codes, and organizational culture.

A Metrics Taxonomy and Reporting Strategy for Rule-Based Alerts.

An action-oriented alerts taxonomy according to structure, actions, and implicit intended process outcomes using a set of 333 rule-based alerts at Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) was developed. The authors identified 9 major and 17 overall classes of alerts and developed a specific metric approach for 5 of these classes, including the 3 most numerous ones in KPNW, accounting for 224 (67%) of the alerts.

Reducing warfarin medication interactions: an interrupted time series evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Computerized decision support reduces medication errors in inpatients, but limited evidence supports its effectiveness in reducing the coprescribing of interacting medications, especially in the outpatient setting. The usefulness of academic detailing to enhance the effectiveness of medication interaction alerts also is uncertain. METHODS: This study used an interrupted time series design. In a health maintenance organization with an electronic medical record, we evaluated the effectiveness of electronic medical record alerts and group academic detailing to reduce the coprescribing of warfarin and interacting medications. Participants were 239 primary care providers at 15 primary care clinics and 9910 patients taking warfarin. All 15 clinics received electronic medical record alerts for the coprescription of warfarin and 5 interacting medications: acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, fluconazole, metronidazole, and sulfamethoxazole. Seven clinics were randomly assigned to receive group academic detailing. The primary outcome, the interacting prescription rate (ie, the number of coprescriptions of warfarin-interacting medications per 10 000 warfarin users per month), was analyzed with segmented regression models, controlling for preintervention trends. RESULTS: At baseline, nearly a third of patients had an interacting prescription. Coinciding with the alerts, there was an immediate and continued reduction in the warfarin-interacting medication prescription rate (from 3294.0 to 2804.2), resulting in a 14.9% relative reduction (95% confidence interval, -19.5 to -10.2) at 12 months. Group academic detailing did not enhance alert effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: This study, using a strong and quasi-experimental design in ambulatory care, found that medication interaction alerts modestly reduced the frequency of coprescribing of interacting medications. Additional efforts will be required to further reduce rates of inappropriate prescribing of warfarin with interacting drugs.

A survey of factors affecting clinician acceptance of clinical decision support.

BACKGROUND: Real-time clinical decision support (CDS) integrated into clinicians' workflow has the potential to profoundly affect the cost, quality, and safety of health care delivery. Recent reports have identified a surprisingly low acceptance rate for different types of CDS. We hypothesized that factors affecting CDS system acceptance could be categorized as relating to differences in patients, physicians, CDS-type, or environmental characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a survey of all adult primary care physicians (PCPs, n = 225) within our group model Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) to identify factors that affect their acceptance of CDS. We defined clinical decision support broadly as "clinical information" that is either provided to you or accessible by you, from the clinical workstation (e.g., enhanced flow sheet displays, health maintenance reminders, alternative medication suggestions, order sets, alerts, and access to any internet-based information resources). RESULTS: 110 surveys were returned (49%). There were no differences in the age, gender, or years of service between those who returned the survey and the entire adult PCP population. Overall, clinicians stated that the CDS provided "helps them take better care of their patients" (3.6 on scale of 1:Never-5:Always), "is worth the time it takes" (3.5), and "reminds them of something they've forgotten" (3.2). There was no difference in the perceived acceptance rate of alerts based on their type (i.e., cost, safety, health maintenance). When asked about specific patient characteristics that would make the clinicians "more", "equally" or "less" likely to accept alerts: 41% stated that they were more (8% stated "less") likely to accept alerts on elderly patients (> 65 yrs); 38% were more (14% stated less) likely to accept alerts on patients with more than 5 current medications; and 38% were more (20% stated less) likely to accept alerts on patients with more than 5 chronic clinical conditions. Interestingly, 80% said they were less likely to accept alerts when they were behind schedule and 84% of clinicians admitted to being at least 20 minutes behind schedule "some", "most", or "all of the time". CONCLUSION: Even though a majority of our clinical decision support suggestions are not explicitly followed, clinicians feel they are of benefit and would be even more beneficial if they had more time available to address them.

How to design computerized alerts to safe prescribing practices.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors and preventable adverse drug events are common, and about half of medication errors occur during medication ordering. This study was designed to develop and evaluate medication safety alerts and processes for educating prescribers about the alerts. METHODS: At Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a group-model health maintenance organization where prescribers have used computerized order entry since 1996, qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 primary care prescribers. RESULTS: Prescribers considered alerts helpful for providing prescribing and preventive health information. More than half the interviewees stated that it would be unwise to let clinicians control or avoid safety alerts. Common frustrations were (1) being delayed by the alert, (2) having difficulty interpreting the alert, and (3) receiving the same alert repeatedly. Most prescribers preferred small-group educational sessions tied to existing meetings and having local physicians conduct education sessions. DISCUSSION: The findings were used to design a strategy for introducing and promoting the interventions, modifying the alert text and tools, and focusing the education on how clinicians could use the alerts effectively.