Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32159770›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2020

A systematic review of the impact of health information technology on nurses' time.

Esther C Moore, Clare L Tolley, David W Bates, Sarah P Slight

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Esther C MooreSchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Clare L TolleySchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
David W BatesThe Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sarah P SlightSchool of Pharmacy, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveNursing time represents one of the highest costs for most health services. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on the impact of health information technology on nurses' time. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe followed PRISMA guidelines and searched 6 large databases for relevant articles published between Jan 2004 and December 2019. Two authors reviewed the titles, abstracts, and full texts. We included articles that included a comparison group in the design, measured the time taken to carry out documentation or medication administration, documented the quantitative estimates of time differences between the 2, had nurses as subjects, and was conducted in either a care home, hospital, or community clinic.

resultsWe identified a total of 1647 articles, of which 33 met our inclusion criteria. Twenty-one studies reported the impact of 12 different health information technology (HIT) implementations on nurses' documentation time. Weighted averages were calculated for studies that implemented barcode medication administration (BCMA) and 2 weighted averages for those that implemented EHRs, as these studies used different sampling units; both showed an increase in the time spent in documentation (+22% and +46%). However, the time spent carrying out medication administration following BCMA implementation fell by 33% (P < .05). HIT also caused a redistribution of nurses' time which, in some cases, was spent in more "value-adding" activities, such as delivering direct patient care as well as inter-professional communication. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsMost of the HIT systems increased nursing documentation time, although time fell for medication administration following BCMA. Many HIT systems also resulted in nurses spending more time in direct care and "value-adding" activities.

Indexed as

DocumentationMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedNursing InformaticsNursing RecordsHumansMedical Informatics ApplicationsTask Performance and AnalysisTime FactorsWorkloadcomputerizedhealth information technologymedical records systemsnursestime management

Identifiers

PMID32159770
PMCPMC7309250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.