ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017
A novel use of the discrete templated notes within an electronic health record software to monitor resident supervision.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Uses of Electronic Health Record Data to Measure the Clinical Learning Environment of Graduate Medical Education Trainees: A Systematic Review.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy and unintended consequences of hard-stop alerts in electronic health record systems: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Pooled it
- Clinical Informatics Researcher's Desiderata for the Data Content of the Next Generation Electronic Health Record.Applied clinical informatics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMonitoring the supervision of residents can be a challenging task. We describe our experience with the implementation of a templated note system for documenting procedures with the aim of enabling automated, discrete, and standardized capture of documentation of supervision of residents performing floor-based procedures, with minimal extra effort from the residents. MATERIALS AND
methodsProcedural note templates were designed using the standard existing template within a commercial electronic health record software. Templates for common procedures were created such that residents could document every procedure performed outside of the formal procedural areas. Automated reports were generated and letters were sent to noncompliers.
resultsA total of 27 045 inpatient non-formal procedural area procedures were recorded from August 2012 to June 2014. Compliance with NoteWriter template usage averaged 86% in the first year and increased to 94.6% in the second year ( P = .0055). Initially, only 12.5% of residents documented supervision of any form. By the end of the first year, this was above 80%, with the gains maintained into the second year and beyond. Direct supervision was documented to have occurred where required in 62.8% in the first year and increased to 99.8% in the second year ( P = .0001) after the addition of hard stops. Notification of attendings prior to procedures was documented 100% of the time by September 2013. Letters sent to errant residents decreased from 3.6 to 0.83 per 100 residents per week.
conclusionThe templated procedure note system with hard stops and integrated reporting can successfully be used to improve monitoring of resident supervision. This has potential impact on resident education and patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.