Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31009284›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology practice2019

Clinician Perspectives on Electronic Health Records, Communication, and Patient Safety Across Diverse Medical Oncology Practices.

Minal R Patel, Christopher R Friese, Kari Mendelsohn-Victor, Alex J Fauer, Bidisha Ghosh, Louise Bedard, Jennifer J Griggs, Milisa Manojlovich

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Minal R Patel1 University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI.
Christopher R Friese1 University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI.
Kari Mendelsohn-Victor3 University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI.
Alex J Fauer3 University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI.
Bidisha Ghosh3 University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI.
Louise Bedard4 Michigan Oncology Quality Consortium, Ann Arbor, MI.
Jennifer J Griggs1 University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI.
Milisa Manojlovich3 University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI.
Michigan Department of Health and Human Services · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

XenograftP30CA046592 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Alexey I Nesvizhskii · 1988 to 2026
$178.2M
Communication Processes, Technology, and Patient Safety in Ambulatory Oncology SettingsR01HS024914 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI FRIESE, CHRISTOPHER R · 2016 to 2018
$1.4M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS024914NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046592
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe know little about how increased technological sophistication of clinical practices affects safety of chemotherapy delivery in the outpatient setting. This study investigated to what degree electronic health records (EHRs), satisfaction with technology, and quality of clinician-to-clinician communication enable a safety culture.

methodsWe measured actions consistent with a safety culture, satisfaction with practice technology, and quality of clinician communication using validated instruments among 297 oncology nurses and prescribers in a statewide collaborative. We constructed an index to reflect practice reliance on EHRs (1 = "all paper" to 5 = "all electronic"). Linear regression models (with robust SEs to account for clustering) examined relationships between independent variables of interest and safety. Models were adjusted for clinician age.

resultsThe survey response rate was 68% (76% for nurses and 59% for prescribers). The mean (standard deviation) safety score was 5.3 (1.1), with a practice-level range of 4.9 to 5.4. Prescribers reported fewer safety actions than nurses. Higher satisfaction with technology and higher-quality clinician communication were significantly associated with increased safety actions, whereas increased reliance on EHRs was significantly associated with lower safety actions.

conclusionPractices vary in their performance of patient safety actions. Supporting clinicians to integrate technology and strengthen communication are promising intervention targets. The inverse relationship between reliance on EHRs and safety suggests that technology may not facilitate clinicians' ability to attend to patient safety. Efforts to improve cancer care quality should focus on more seamless integration of EHRs into routine care delivery and emphasize increasing the capacity of all care clinicians to communicate effectively and coordinate efforts when administering high-risk treatments in ambulatory settings.

Indexed as

CommunicationAmbulatory Care FacilitiesElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleMedical OncologyMiddle AgedOrganizational CulturePatient SafetyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality of Health CareSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID31009284
PMCPMC6804874
OpenAlexW2941768740

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.