Dashboards for visual display of patient safety data: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Methods to visualise patient safety data can support effective monitoring of safety events and discovery of trends. While quality dashboards are common, use and impact of dashboards to visualise patient safety event data remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To understand development, use and direct or indirect impacts of patient safety dashboards. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL for publications between 1 January 1950 and 30 August 2018 involving use of dashboards to display data related to safety targets defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Net. Two reviewers independently reviewed search results for inclusion in analysis and resolved disagreements by consensus. We collected data on development, use and impact via standardised data collection forms and analysed data using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Literature search identified 4624 results which were narrowed to 33 publications after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and consensus across reviewers. Publications included only time series and case study designs and were inpatient focused and emergency department focused. Information on direct impact of dashboards was limited, and only four studies included informatics or human factors principles in development or postimplementation evaluation. DISCUSSION: Use of patient-safety dashboards has grown over the past 15 years, but impact remains poorly understood. Dashboard design processes rarely use informatics or human factors principles to ensure that the available content and navigation assists task completion, communication or decision making. CONCLUSION: Design and usability evaluation of patient safety dashboards should incorporate informatics and human factors principles. Future assessments should also rigorously explore their potential to support patient safety monitoring including direct or indirect impact on patient safety.

Application of Human Factors Methods to Understand Missed Follow-up of Abnormal Test Results.

OBJECTIVE: This study demonstrates application of human factors methods for understanding causes for lack of timely follow-up of abnormal test results ("missed results") in outpatient settings. METHODS: We identified 30 cases of missed test results by querying electronic health record data, developed a critical decision method (CDM)-based interview guide to understand decision-making processes, and interviewed physicians who ordered these tests. We analyzed transcribed responses using a contextual inquiry (CI)-based methodology to identify contextual factors contributing to missed results. We then developed a CI-based flow model and conducted a fault tree analysis (FTA) to identify hierarchical relationships between factors that delayed action. RESULTS: The flow model highlighted barriers in information flow and decision making, and the hierarchical model identified relationships between contributing factors for delayed action. Key findings including underdeveloped methods to track follow-up, as well as mismatches, in communication channels, timeframes, and expectations between patients and physicians. CONCLUSION: This case report illustrates how human factors-based approaches can enable analysis of contributing factors that lead to missed results, thus informing development of preventive strategies to address them.

Provider Preference in Exam Room Layout Design and Computing.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of the electronic health record (EHR) has had a significant impact on provider-patient interactions, particularly revolving around patient-centeredness. More research is needed to understand the provider perspective of this interaction. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to obtain provider feedback on a new exam room design compared with the one already in use with respect to the computing layout, which included a wall-mounted monitor for ease of (re)-positioning. An additional objective was to understand elements of exam room design and computing that were highly valued. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 28 providers from several health care organizations. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis. We used an inductive coding approach to abstract recurrent themes from the data. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed several themes organized around exam room layout, exam room computing, and provider workflow. We report frequency of occurrence of the coded data for computer accessories, computing usefulness, computer mobility, documentation habits, form factor, layout preference, patient interaction, screen sharing, and work habits. CONCLUSION: Providers in our study preferred exam room design to promote flexibility, mobility, and body orientation directed toward the patient. Providers also expressed the need for exam room design to support varying work habits and preferences, including whether to share the computer screen or not.

An Exploration of Barriers, Facilitators, and Suggestions for Improving Electronic Health Record Inbox-Related Usability: A Qualitative Analysis.

Importance: Managing messages in the electronic health record (EHR) inbox consumes substantial amounts of physician time. Certain factors associated with inbox management, such as poor usability and excessive and unnecessary inbox messages, have been associated with physician burnout. Additionally, inbox design, usability, and workflows are associated with physicians' situational awareness (ie, perception, comprehension, and projection of clinical status) and efficiency of processing EHR inbox messages. Understanding factors associated with inbox usability could improve future EHR inbox designs and workflows, thus reducing risk of burnout while improving patient safety. Objective: To determine barriers, facilitators, and suggestions associated with EHR inbox-related usability. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study included cognitive walkthroughs of EHR inbox management with 25 physicians (17 primary care physicians and 8 specialists) at 6 large health care organizations using 4 different EHR systems between May 6, 2015, and September 19, 2016. While processing EHR inbox messages, participants identified facilitators and barriers associated with EHR inbox situational awareness and processing efficiency and potential interventions to address such barriers. A qualitative analysis was performed on transcribed recordings using an inductive thematic approach with an 8-dimension sociotechnical model as a theoretical lens from May 6, 2015, to August 15, 2019. Results: The cognitive walkthroughs identified 60 barriers, 32 facilitators, and 28 suggestions for improving the EHR inbox. Emergent data fit within 5 major themes: message processing complexity, inbox interface design, cognitive load, team communication, and inbox message content. Within these themes, similar barriers were identified across sites, such as poor usability due the high numbers of clicks needed to accomplish actions. In certain instances, an identified facilitator at one site provided the exact solution needed to address a barrier identified at another site. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study found that usability of the EHR inbox is often suboptimal and variable across sites, suggesting lack of shared best practices related to information management. Implementation of optimized design features and workflows will require EHR developers and health care organizations to collectively share this responsibility. Development of regional or national consortia to support collaborative sharing and implementation of EHR system best practices across EHR developers and health care organizations could also improve safety and efficiency and reduce physician burnout.

Practicing Clinicians' Recommendations to Reduce Burden from the Electronic Health Record Inbox: a Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Workload from electronic health record (EHR) inbox notifications leads to information overload and contributes to job dissatisfaction and physician burnout. Better understanding of physicians' inbox requirements and workflows could optimize inbox designs, enhance efficiency, and reduce safety risks from information overload. DESIGN: We conducted a mixed-methods study to identify strategies to enhance EHR inbox design and workflow. First, we performed a secondary analysis of national survey data of all Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care practitioners (PCP) to identify major themes in responses to a free-text question soliciting suggestions to improve EHR inbox design and workflows. We then conducted expert interviews of clinicians at five health care systems (1 VA and 4 non-VA settings using 4 different EHRs) to understand existing optimal strategies to improve efficiency and situational awareness related to EHR inbox use. Themes from survey data were cross-validated with interview findings. RESULTS: We analyzed responses from 2104 PCPs who completed the free-text inbox question (of 5001 PCPs who responded to survey) and used an inductive approach to identify five themes: (1) Inbox notification content should be actionable for patient care and relevant to recipient clinician, (2) Inboxes should reduce risk of losing messages, (3) Inbox functionality should be optimized to improve efficiency of processing notifications, (4) Team support should be leveraged to help with EHR inbox notification burden, (5) Sufficient time should be provided to all clinicians to process EHR inbox notifications. We subsequently interviewed 15 VA and non-VA clinicians and identified 11 unique strategies, each corresponding directly with one of these five themes. CONCLUSION: Feedback from practicing end-user clinicians provides robust evidence to improve content and design of the EHR inbox and related clinical workflows and organizational policies. Several strategies we identified could improve clinicians' EHR efficiency and satisfaction as well as empower them to work with their local administrators, health IT personnel, and EHR developers to improve these systems.

Barriers and facilitators impacting reliability of the electronic health record-facilitated total testing process.

OBJECTIVE: Despite ongoing efforts to improve reliability of the total testing process (TTP), breakdowns continue to occur resulting in diagnostic delays and suboptimal patient outcomes. We performed an exploratory study to identify factors that impact TTP reliability in electronic health record (EHR)-enabled care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We interviewed experts at three large EHR-enabled health care organizations and identified all TTP steps performed from clinician test ordering to result communication to patients. Findings from all sites were combined to develop a detailed process map of known TTP activities. We additionally asked experts about factors that positively or negatively impacted TTP reliability at each step. We describe the specific TTP steps identified and associated barriers and facilitators to TTP reliability. RESULTS: We interviewed 39 experts involved in or overseeing the TTP. Most TTP activities identified were similar across sites, but we found significant differences with test order transmission to diagnostic services and relay of results back to clinicians and patients. Twenty-five unique barriers were identified related to technology and EHR usability issues, time and resource constraints, suboptimal clinic workflows, patient-related factors, information access limitations, and insufficient clinician training. Twenty-four unique facilitators were identified related to personnel training, workflow optimization and standardization, helpful EHR features, and improved electronic communication between clinics and diagnostic services. DISCUSSION: Barriers related to EHR usability and with communication between clinicians and diagnostic services increase TTP vulnerability and should be targeted by future efforts to improve process reliability. Several facilitators identified in the study could inform future strategies and solutions to improve TTP reliability.

Field Investigation of Ambulatory Clinic Exam Room Design with respect to Computing Devices: A Pilot Study.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has developed a new exam room design standard that is intended to facilitate a greater degree of patient centeredness. This new design includes a wall-mounted monitor on an armature system and a moveable table workspace. To date, however, this design has not been formally evaluated in a field setting. We conducted observations and interviews with primary care providers and their patients from three locations within the Phoenix VA Health Care System, in a pilot study comparing the new exam room design standard with the older legacy exam rooms. When using the new exam room layout, providers spent a greater proportion of time focused on the patient, spent more time in screen-sharing activities with the patient, and had a higher degree of self-reported situation awareness. However, the legacy exam rooms were perceived as better facilitating workflow integration. Provider and patient debrief interviews were supportive of the new exam room design. Overall, our field study results suggest that the new exam room design does contribute to a greater degree of patient centeredness, though more thorough evaluations are required to support these preliminary results.

Adherence to recommended electronic health record safety practices across eight health care organizations.

Objective: The Safety Assurance Factors for EHR Resilience (SAFER) guides were released in 2014 to help health systems conduct proactive risk assessment of electronic health record (EHR)- safety related policies, processes, procedures, and configurations. The extent to which SAFER recommendations are followed is unknown. Methods: We conducted risk assessments of 8 organizations of varying size, complexity, EHR, and EHR adoption maturity. Each organization self-assessed adherence to all 140 unique SAFER recommendations contained within 9 guides (range 10-29 recommendations per guide). In each guide, recommendations were organized into 3 broad domains: "safe health IT" (total 45 recommendations); "using health IT safely" (total 80 recommendations); and "monitoring health IT" (total 15 recommendations). Results: The 8 sites fully implemented 25 of 140 (18%) SAFER recommendations. Mean number of "fully implemented" recommendations per guide ranged from 94% (System Interfaces-18 recommendations) to 63% (Clinical Communication-12 recommendations). Adherence was higher for "safe health IT" domain (82.1%) vs "using health IT safely" (72.5%) and "monitoring health IT" (67.3%). Conclusions: Despite availability of recommendations on how to improve use of EHRs, most recommendations were not fully implemented. New national policy initiatives are needed to stimulate implementation of these best practices.

Ambulatory Clinic Exam Room Design with respect to Computing Devices: A Laboratory Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Challenges persist regarding how to integrate computing effectively into the exam room, while maintaining patient-centered care. PURPOSE: Our objective was to evaluate a new exam room design with respect to the computing layout, which included a wall-mounted monitor for ease of (re)-positioning. METHODS: In a lab-based experiment, 28 providers used prototypes of the new and older "legacy" outpatient exam room layouts in a within-subject comparison using simulated patient encounters. We measured efficiency, errors, workload, patient-centeredness (proportion of time the provider was focused on the patient), amount of screen sharing with the patient, workflow integration, and provider situation awareness. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the exam room layouts for efficiency, errors, or time spent focused on the patient. However, when using the new layout providers spent 75% more time in screen sharing activities with the patient, had 31% lower workload, and gave higher ratings for situation awareness (14%) and workflow integration (17%). CONCLUSIONS: Providers seemed to be unwilling to compromise their focus on the patient when the computer was in a fixed position in the corner of the room and, as a result, experienced greater workload, lower situation awareness, and poorer workflow integration when using the old "legacy" layout. A thoughtful design of the exam room with respect to the computing may positively impact providers' workload, situation awareness, time spent in screen sharing activities, and workflow integration.