Varying rates of patient identity verification when using computerized provider order entry.
Citation: Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 27(6):924-928, 2020 06 01.PMID: 32377679Institution: MedStar Institute for Innovation | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: Emergency Medicine | National Center for Human Factors in HealthcareForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Medical Order Entry Systems | *Patient Identification Systems | *Patient Safety | Delivery of Health Care | Humans | Physicians | Software | Time and Motion StudiesYear: 2020Local holdings: Available online through MWHC library: 2003 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - presentISSN:- 1067-5027
Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Journal Article | MedStar Authors Catalog | Article | 32377679 | Available | 32377679 |
Available online through MWHC library: 2003 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - present
CONCLUSIONS: Verification rates vary by CPOE product, and this can have patient safety consequences. Copyright (c) The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: [email protected].
DISCUSSION: Factors such as CPOE design, physician training, and the use of a simulated methodology may be impacting verification rates.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-five physicians from 4 healthcare systems completed simulated patient scenarios using their respective CPOE system (Epic or Cerner). Eye movements were recorded and analyzed.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine rates of computerized provider order entry (CPOE) patient identity verification and when and where in the ordering process verification occurred.
RESULTS: Across all participants patient id was verified significantly more often than not (62.4% vs 37.6%). Vendor A had significantly higher verification rates than not; vendor B had no difference. Participants using vendor A verified information significantly more often before signing the order than after (88.4% vs 11.6%); there was no difference in vendor B. The banner bar was the most frequent verification location.
English