Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11418543›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Controlled trial of direct physician order entry: effects on physicians' time utilization in ambulatory primary care internal medicine practices.

J M Overhage, S Perkins, W M Tierney, C J McDonald

Abstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. How Do Residents Spend Their Shift Time? A Time and Motion Study With a Particular Focus on the Use of Computers.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

J M OverhageRegenstrief Institute for Health Care, Regenstrief Health Center, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202, USA. joverhag@iupui.edu
S Perkins
W M Tierney
C J McDonald

Funding

HEALTH APPLICATIONS FOR THE NATIONAL INFROMATIONN01LM063546 · NLM · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI MCDONALD, CLEMENT J · 1996 to 2000
$0k
TESTBED NETWORK FOR BIOMEDICAL DATA IMAGE SHARINGN01LM043510 · NLM · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI MCDONALD, CLEMENT J · 1994 to 1997
–
NLM NIH HHS N01-LM-4-3510NLM NIH HHS N01-LM-6-3546
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDirect physician order entry (POE) offers many potential benefits, but evidence suggests that POE requires substantially more time than traditional paper-based ordering methods. The Medical Gopher is a well-accepted system for direct POE that has been in use for more than 15 years. The authors hypothesized that physicians using the Gopher would not spend any more time writing orders than physicians using paper-based methods.

designA randomized controlled trial of POE using the Medical Gopher system in 11 primary care internal medicine practices. MEASUREMENTS: The authors collected detailed time use data using time motion studies of the physicians and surveyed their opinions about the POE system.

resultsThe authors found that physicians using the Gopher spent 2.2 min more per patient overall, but when duplicative and administrative tasks were taken into account, physicians were found to have spent only 0.43 min more per patient. With experience, the order entry time fell by 3.73 min per patient. The survey revealed that the physicians believed that the system improved their patient care and wanted the Gopher to continue to be available in their practices.

conclusionsLittle extra time, if any, was required for physicians to use the POE system. With experience in its use, physicians may even save time while enjoying the many benefits of POE.

Indexed as

Hospital Information SystemsMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedAttitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to ComputersData CollectionDecision Making, Computer-AssistedHumansMicrocomputersTime and Motion Studies

Identifiers

PMID11418543
PMCPMC130081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.