Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23796627›Full record

ArticleAnnals of emergency medicine2013

Quality and safety implications of emergency department information systems.

Heather L Farley, Kevin M Baumlin, Azita G Hamedani, Dickson S Cheung, Michael R Edwards, Drew C Fuller, Nicholas Genes, Richard T Griffey, John J Kelly, James C McClay and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of emergency medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Resource planning strategies for healthcare systems during a pandemic.European journal of operational research · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Varying rates of patient identity verification when using computerized provider order entry.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Role of Clinical Pharmacists in the Emergency Department.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2018
    Article
  20. Article
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

15 authors.

Heather L FarleyDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: hfarley@christianacare.org.
Kevin M Baumlin
Azita G Hamedani
Dickson S Cheung
Michael R Edwards
Drew C Fuller
Nicholas Genes
Richard T Griffey
John J Kelly
James C McClay
Jeff Nielson
Michael P Phelan
Jason S Shapiro
Suzanne Stone-Griffith
Jesse M Pines

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY CER MENTORED CAREER DEVELOPMENT AWARD KM1KM1CA156708 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI FRASER, VICTORIA J. · 2010 to 2010
$2.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NCI NIH HHS KM1 CA156708
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services "meaningful use" incentive programs, in tandem with the boundless additional requirements for detailed reporting of quality metrics, have galvanized hospital efforts to implement hospital-based electronic health records. As such, emergency department information systems (EDISs) are an important and unique component of most hospitals' electronic health records. System functionality varies greatly and affects physician decisionmaking, clinician workflow, communication, and, ultimately, the overall quality of care and patient safety. This article is a joint effort by members of the Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Section and the Informatics Section of the American College of Emergency Physicians. The aim of this effort is to examine the benefits and potential threats to quality and patient safety that could result from the choice of a particular EDIS, its implementation and optimization, and the hospital's or physician group's approach to continuous improvement of the EDIS. Specifically, we explored the following areas of potential EDIS safety concerns: communication failure, wrong order-wrong patient errors, poor data display, and alert fatigue. Case studies are presented that illustrate the potential harm that could befall patients from an inferior EDIS product or suboptimal execution of such a product in the clinical environment. The authors have developed 7 recommendations to improve patient safety with respect to the deployment of EDISs. These include ensuring that emergency providers actively participate in selection of the EDIS product, in the design of processes related to EDIS implementation and optimization, and in the monitoring of the system's ongoing success or failure. Our recommendations apply to emergency departments using any type of EDIS: custom-developed systems, best-of-breed vendor systems, or enterprise systems.

Indexed as

Clinical AlarmsCommunicationElectronic Health RecordsEmergency Service, HospitalHospital Information SystemsHumansMedical ErrorsPatient SafetyQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID23796627
PMCPMC3880777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.