Implications of electronic health record downtime: an analysis of patient safety event reports.

MedStar author(s):
Citation: Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 25(2):187-191, 2018 Feb 01PMID: 28575417Institution: MedStar Institute for Innovation | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Electronic Health Records | *Medical Errors/sn [Statistics & Numerical Data] | *Patient Safety | Equipment Failure | Health Facilities | HumansYear: 2018ISSN:
  • 1067-5027
Name of journal: Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAAbstract: Conclusion: EHR downtime events pose patient safety hazards, and we highlight critical areas for downtime procedure improvement.Discussion: Patient safety report data offer a lens into EHR downtime-related safety hazards. Important areas of risk during EHR downtime periods were patient identification and communication of clinical information; these should be a focus of downtime procedure planning to reduce safety hazards.Materials and Methods: From a database of 80381 event reports, 76 reports were identified as explicitly describing a safety event associated with an EHR downtime period. These reports were analyzed and categorized based on a developed code book to identify the clinical processes that were impacted by downtime. We also examined whether downtime procedures were in place and followed.Objective: We sought to understand the types of clinical processes, such as image and medication ordering, that are disrupted during electronic health record (EHR) downtime periods by analyzing the narratives of patient safety event report data.Results: The reports were coded into categories related to their reported clinical process: Laboratory, Medication, Imaging, Registration, Patient Handoff, Documentation, History Viewing, Delay of Procedure, and General. A majority of reports (48.7%, n=37) were associated with lab orders and results, followed by medication ordering and administration (14.5%, n=11). Incidents commonly involved patient identification and communication of clinical information. A majority of reports (46%, n=35) indicated that downtime procedures either were not followed or were not in place. Only 27.6% of incidents (n=21) indicated that downtime procedures were successfully executed.All authors: Fong A, Larsen E, Ratwani RM, Wernz CFiscal year: FY2018Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2018-02-20
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 28575417 Available 28575417

Conclusion: EHR downtime events pose patient safety hazards, and we highlight critical areas for downtime procedure improvement.

Discussion: Patient safety report data offer a lens into EHR downtime-related safety hazards. Important areas of risk during EHR downtime periods were patient identification and communication of clinical information; these should be a focus of downtime procedure planning to reduce safety hazards.

Materials and Methods: From a database of 80381 event reports, 76 reports were identified as explicitly describing a safety event associated with an EHR downtime period. These reports were analyzed and categorized based on a developed code book to identify the clinical processes that were impacted by downtime. We also examined whether downtime procedures were in place and followed.

Objective: We sought to understand the types of clinical processes, such as image and medication ordering, that are disrupted during electronic health record (EHR) downtime periods by analyzing the narratives of patient safety event report data.

Results: The reports were coded into categories related to their reported clinical process: Laboratory, Medication, Imaging, Registration, Patient Handoff, Documentation, History Viewing, Delay of Procedure, and General. A majority of reports (48.7%, n=37) were associated with lab orders and results, followed by medication ordering and administration (14.5%, n=11). Incidents commonly involved patient identification and communication of clinical information. A majority of reports (46%, n=35) indicated that downtime procedures either were not followed or were not in place. Only 27.6% of incidents (n=21) indicated that downtime procedures were successfully executed.

English

Powered by Koha