Dataset Information

Analysing EHR navigation patterns and digital workflows among physicians during ICU pre-rounds.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Some physicians in intensive care units (ICUs) report that electronic health records (EHRs) can be cumbersome and disruptive to workflow. There are significant gaps in our understanding of the physician-EHR interaction.

Objective

To better understand how clinicians use the EHR for chart review during ICU pre-rounds through the characterisation and description of screen navigation pathways and workflow patterns.

Method

We conducted a live, direct observational study of six physician trainees performing electronic chart review during daily pre-rounds in the 30-bed medical ICU at a large academic medical centre in the Southeastern United States. A tailored checklist was used by observers for data collection.

Results

We observed 52 distinct live patient chart review encounters, capturing a total of 2.7 hours of pre-rounding chart review activity by six individual physicians. Physicians reviewed an average of 8.7 patients (range = 5-12), spending a mean of 3:05 minutes per patient (range = 1:34-5:18). On average, physicians visited 6.3 (±3.1) total EHR screens per patient (range = 1-16). Four unique screens were viewed most commonly, accounting for over half (52.7%) of all screen visits: results review (17.9%), summary/overview (13.0%), flowsheet (12.7%), and the chart review tab (9.1%). Navigation pathways were highly variable, but several common screen transition patterns emerged across users. Average interrater reliability for the paired EHR observation was 80.0%.

Conclusion

We observed the physician-EHR interaction during ICU pre-rounds to be brief and highly focused. Although we observed a high degree of "information sprawl" in physicians' digital navigation, we also identified common launch points for electronic chart review, key high-traffic screens and common screen transition patterns.

Implications

From the study findings, we suggest recommendations towards improved EHR design.

SUBMITTER: Coleman C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8435833 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:During training, fellows serve as teachers and role models for junior colleagues. Fellows-as-teachers curricula may support these roles, but little is known about their effectiveness and durability. We sought to measure the long-term effects on ICU rounds after administering fellows-as-teachers workshops.DesignProspective pre-/postintervention observational study of ICU rounds.SettingTertiary-care medical ICU with both pulmonary critical care and critical care medicine fellowships.SubjectsICU teaching teams.InterventionsFellows attended immersive workshops on promoting clinical reasoning, managing the learning environment, teaching bedside skills, and developing situational awareness on ICU rounds. After the workshops, faculty physicians were encouraged to have fellows routinely lead afternoon rounds.Measurements and main resultsWe gathered data from direct observations of ICU rounding activities, residents' evaluations of rounds from surveys, and faculty physicians' written comments on fellows' performance in the ICU from end-of-rotation evaluations. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, nonparametric comparative tests, and chi-square tests for categorical data. A total of 61 ICU rounding sessions were observed with 501 discrete provider-patient interactions. Survey responses were collected from a total of 53 residents preintervention and 34 residents postintervention. We reviewed 72 open-ended faculty comments on fellows' end-of-rotation evaluations, with 22 occurring postintervention. During the postintervention period, fellows were significantly more likely to make clinical decisions, explain their reasoning, provide teaching points, and ask questions on rounds. Additionally, we observed significantly higher quality written feedback on end-of-rotation evaluations by faculty physicians. However, residents generally harbored neutral or negative perceptions about the educational value of fellow-led rounds postintervention.ConclusionsFellows' contributions to patient care and teaching on ICU rounds increased for several months after our fellows-as-teachers workshops. Despite limitations and contamination in our design, our data suggest that similarly designed curricula may promote fellow engagement, possibly at the expense of residents' education.

Project description:BackgroundDigitalisation affects 90% of healthcare. Digital health, however, does not only refer to technological transformation but also has considerable cultural and social consequences. It fundamentally reshapes the roles of physicians and patients, as well as their relationship. Moreover, from the second half of the 20th century, the growing number of chronic patients and the increase in life expectancy have posed new challenges to the medical workforce.ObjectivesTo explore the digitally engaged physician's knowledge and attitudes towards digital health technologies and the transformation of the doctor-patient relationship.MethodsA qualitative interview study analysed with Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). The study is based on qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 11 digitally engaged physicians from 9 countries. We identified four main themes emerging from e-physicians' responses and experience: 1) the past: intentions and experiences of change, 2) the present: the role of digital health and technology in the medical practice and their everyday challenges, 3) the present: the practical and ideal physician-patient relationship, and 4) the future: skills and competencies needed for working with e-patients and visions about the future of the medical practice.ResultsThe interviewed physicians state that digital health solutions could create a deeper doctor-patient relationship: knowledgeable patients are a huge help in the joint work effort and technology is the main tool for creating a more involved and responsible patient. Medical professionals in the future might rather get a role as a translator between technical data and the patient; as a guide in the jungle of digital health. However, the interviewed physicians also noted that digital transition today is more beneficial to patients than to their doctors.ConclusionsWe state that digitally engaged physicians are characterized by a kind of dichotomy: they use digital opportunities enthusiastically, but they also feel the difficulties related to digital health.

Project description:Background: In 2013, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) released a revised guideline on statin therapy initiation. The guideline included a 10-year risk calculation based on regression modeling, which made hand calculation infeasible. Compliance to the guideline has been suboptimal, as many patients were recommended but not prescribed statin therapy. Clinical decision support (CDS) tools may improve statin guideline compliance. Few statin guideline CDS tools evaluated clinical outcome.Objectives: We determined if use of a CDS tool, the statin macro, was associated with increased 2013 ACC/AHA statin guideline compliance at the level of statin prescription versus no statin prescription. We did not determine if each patient's statin prescription met ACC/AHA 2013 therapy intensity recommendations (high vs. moderate vs. low).Methods: The authors developed a clinician-initiated, EHR-embedded statin macro command ("statin macro") that displayed the 2013 ACC/AHA statin guideline recommendation in the electronic health record documentation. We included patients who had a primary care visit during the study period (January 1-June 30, 2016), were eligible for statin therapy based on the ACC/AHA guideline prior to the study period, and were not prescribed statin therapy prior to the study period. We tested the association of macro usage and statin therapy prescription during the study period using relative risk and mixed effect logistic regression.Results: Subjects included 11,877 patients seen in primary care, who were retrospectively recommended statin therapy at study initiation based on the ACC/AHA guideline, but who had not received statin therapy. During the study period, 125 clinicians used the statin macro command for 389 of the 11,877 patients (3.2%). Of the 389 patients for whom that statin macro was used, 108 patients (28%) had a statin prescribed during the study period. Of the 11,488 for whom the statin macro was not used, 1,360 (13%) patients received a clinician-prescribed statin (relative risk 2.3, p?<?0.001). Controlling for patient covariates and clinicians, statin macro usage was significantly associated with statin therapy prescription (odds ratio 2.86, p?<?0.001).Conclusion: Although the statin macro had low uptake, its use was associated with a greater rate of statin prescriptions (dosage not determined) for patients whom 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines required statin therapy.