Dataset Information

Designing a medication timeline for patients and physicians.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Most electronic health records display historical medication information only in a data table or clinician notes. We designed a medication timeline visualization intended to improve ease of use, speed, and accuracy in the ambulatory care of chronic disease.

Materials and methods

We identified information needs for understanding a patient medication history, then applied human factors and interaction design principles to support that process. After research and analysis of existing medication lists and timelines to guide initial requirements, we hosted design workshops with multidisciplinary stakeholders to expand on our initial concepts. Subsequent core team meetings used an iterative user-centered design approach to refine our prototype. Finally, a small pilot evaluation of the design was conducted with practicing physicians.

Results

We propose an open-source online prototype that incorporates user feedback from initial design workshops, and broad multidisciplinary audience feedback. We describe the applicable design principles associated with each of the prototype's key features. A pilot evaluation of the design showed improved physician performance in 5 common medication-related tasks, compared to tabular presentation of the same information.

Discussion

There is industry interest in developing medication timelines based on the example prototype concepts. An open, standards-based technology platform could enable developers to create a medication timeline that could be deployable across any compatible health IT application.

Conclusion

The design goal was to improve physician understanding of a patient's complex medication history, using a medication timeline visualization. Such a design could reduce temporal and cognitive load on physicians for improved and safer care.

SUBMITTER: Belden JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7647176 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn many healthcare systems, physicians are accustomed to periodically participate in individual performance appraisals to guide their professional development. For the purpose of revalidation, or maintenance of certification, they need to demonstrate that they have engaged with the outcomes of these appraisals. The combination of taking ownership in professional development and meeting accountability requirements may cause undesirable interference of purposes. To support physicians in their professional development, new Dutch legislation requires that they discuss their performance data with a non-hierarchical (peer)coach and draft a personal development plan. In this study, we report on the design of this system for performance appraisal in a Dutch academic medical center.MethodsUsing a design-based research approach, a hospital-based research group had the lead in drafting and implementing a performance appraisal protocol, selecting a multisource feedback tool, co-developing and piloting a coaching approach, implementing a planning tool, recruiting peer coaches and facilitating their training and peer group debriefings.ResultsThe system consisted of a two-hour peer-to-peer conversation based on the principles of appreciative inquiry and solution-focused coaching. Sessions were rated as highly motivating, development-oriented, concrete and valuable. Peer coaches were considered suitable, although occasionally physicians preferred a professional coach because of their expertise. The system honored both accountability and professional development purposes. By integrating the performance appraisal system with an already existing internal performance system, physicians were enabled to openly and safely discuss their professional development with a peer, while also being supported by their superior in their self-defined developmental goals. Although the peer-to-peer conversation was mandatory and participation in the process was documented, it was up to the physician whether or not to share its results with others, including their superior.ConclusionsIn the context of mandatory revalidation, professional development can be supported when the appraisal process involves three characteristics: the appraisal process is appreciative and explores developmental opportunities; coaches are trustworthy and skilled; and the physician has control over the disclosure of the appraisal output. Although the peer-to-peer conversations were positively evaluated, the effects on physicians' professional development have yet to be investigated in longitudinal research designs.

Project description:BackgroundPoor adherence is the main barrier to the effectiveness of HIV medication. The objective of this study was to explore and conceptualize patterns and difficulties in physicians' work with patients' adherence to HIV medication. No previous studies on this subject have directly observed physicians' behavior.MethodsThis is a qualitative, cross-sectional study. We used a Grounded Theory approach to let the main issues in physicians' work with patients' adherence emerge without preconceiving the focus of the study. We included physicians from HIV clinics in San Francisco, U.S.A. as well as from Copenhagen, Denmark. Physicians were observed during their clinical work and subsequently interviewed with a semi-structured interview guide. Notes on observations and transcribed interviews were analyzed with NVivo software.ResultsWe enrolled 16 physicians from San Francisco and 18 from Copenhagen. When we discovered that physicians and patients seldom discussed adherence issues in depth, we made adherence communication and its barriers the focus of the study. The main patterns in physicians' communication with patients about adherence were similar in both settings. An important barrier to in-depth adherence communication was that some physicians felt it was awkward to explore the possibility of non-adherence if there were no objective signs of treatment failure, because patients could feel "accused." To overcome this awkwardness, some physicians consciously tried to "de-shame" patients regarding non-adherence. However, a recurring theme was that physicians often suspected non-adherence even when patients did not admit to have missed any doses, and physicians had difficulties handling this low believability of patient statements. We here develop a simple four-step, three-factor model of physicians' adherence communication. The four steps are: deciding whether to ask about adherence or not, pre-questioning preparations, phrasing the question, and responding to the patient's answer. The three factors/determinants are: physicians' perceptions of adherence, awkwardness, and believability.ConclusionCommunication difficulties were a main barrier in physicians' work with patients' adherence to HIV medication. The proposed model of physicians' communication with patients about adherence--and the identification of awkwardness and believability as key issues--may aid thinking on the subject for use in clinical practice and future research.