16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Are all certified EHRs created equal? Assessing the relationship between EHR vendor and hospital meaningful use performance

      , ,
      Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The federal electronic health record (EHR) certification process was intended to ensure a baseline level of system quality and the ability to support meaningful use criteria. We sought to assess whether there was variation across EHR vendors in the degree to which hospitals using products from those vendors were able to achieve high levels of performance on meaningful use criteria.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Reduction in medication errors in hospitals due to adoption of computerized provider order entry systems

          Objective Medication errors in hospitals are common, expensive, and sometimes harmful to patients. This study's objective was to derive a nationally representative estimate of medication error reduction in hospitals attributable to electronic prescribing through computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems. Materials and methods We conducted a systematic literature review and applied random-effects meta-analytic techniques to derive a summary estimate of the effect of CPOE on medication errors. This pooled estimate was combined with data from the 2006 American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Annual Survey, the 2007 American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the latter's 2008 Electronic Health Record Adoption Database supplement to estimate the percentage and absolute reduction in medication errors attributable to CPOE. Results Processing a prescription drug order through a CPOE system decreases the likelihood of error on that order by 48% (95% CI 41% to 55%). Given this effect size, and the degree of CPOE adoption and use in hospitals in 2008, we estimate a 12.5% reduction in medication errors, or ∼17.4 million medication errors averted in the USA in 1 year. Discussion Our findings suggest that CPOE can substantially reduce the frequency of medication errors in inpatient acute-care settings; however, it is unclear whether this translates into reduced harm for patients. Conclusions Despite CPOE systems’ effectiveness at preventing medication errors, adoption and use in US hospitals remain modest. Current policies to increase CPOE adoption and use will likely prevent millions of additional medication errors each year. Further research is needed to better characterize links to patient harm.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Electronic Health Record Adoption In US Hospitals: Progress Continues, But Challenges Persist.

            Achieving nationwide adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) remains an important policy priority. While EHR adoption has increased steadily since 2010, it is unclear how providers that have not yet adopted will fare now that federal incentives have converted to penalties. We used 2008-14 national data, which includes the most recently available, to examine hospital EHR trends. We found large gains in adoption, with 75 percent of US hospitals now having adopted at least a basic EHR system--up from 59 percent in 2013. However, small and rural hospitals continue to lag behind. Among hospitals without a basic EHR system, the function most often not yet adopted (in 61 percent of hospitals) was physician notes. We also saw large increases in the ability to meet core stage 2 meaningful-use criteria (40.5 percent of hospitals, up from 5.8 percent in 2013); much of this progress resulted from increased ability to meet criteria related to exchange of health information with patients and with other physicians during care transitions. Finally, hospitals most often reported up-front and ongoing costs, physician cooperation, and complexity of meeting meaningful-use criteria as challenges. Our findings suggest that nationwide hospital EHR adoption is in reach but will require attention to small and rural hospitals and strategies to address financial challenges, particularly now that penalties for lack of adoption have begun.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Electronic health record usability: analysis of the user-centered design processes of eleven electronic health record vendors.

              The usability of electronic health records (EHRs) continues to be a point of dissatisfaction for providers, despite certification requirements from the Office of the National Coordinator that require EHR vendors to employ a user-centered design (UCD) process. To better understand factors that contribute to poor usability, a research team visited 11 different EHR vendors in order to analyze their UCD processes and discover the specific challenges that vendors faced as they sought to integrate UCD with their EHR development. Our analysis demonstrates a diverse range of vendors' UCD practices that fall into 3 categories: well-developed UCD, basic UCD, and misconceptions of UCD. Specific challenges to practicing UCD include conducting contextually rich studies of clinical workflow, recruiting participants for usability studies, and having support from leadership within the vendor organization. The results of the study provide novel insights for how to improve usability practices of EHR vendors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1067-5027
                1527-974X
                November 24 2017
                November 24 2017
                :
                :
                Article
                10.1093/jamia/ocx135
                7646986
                29186508
                77803f49-eb60-42f2-9f62-858ffd95e5f2
                © 2017
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article