Dataset Information

The impact of electronic prescribing systems on healthcare professionals' working practices in the hospital setting: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise peer-reviewed literature assessing the impact of electronic prescribing (eP) systems on the working practices of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the inpatient setting and identify implications for practice and research. METHODS:We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane and the Cumulative Index to Nursing Allied Health Literature databases for studies published from inception to November 2018. We included controlled, uncontrolled, observational and descriptive studies that explored the effect of eP on HCPs' working practices in an inpatient setting. Data on setting, eP system and impact on working practices were extracted. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Emergent themes were identified and subjected to narrative synthesis. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration CRD42017075804). RESULTS:Searches identified 1301 titles and abstracts after duplicate removal. 171 papers underwent full-text review. A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria, from nine different countries. Nineteen were of commercial eP systems. There were a range of study designs; most (n = 14) adopted quantitative methods such as cross-sectional surveys, ten adopted qualitative approaches and a further one used mixed methods. Fourteen of the 25 studies were deemed to be of high quality. Four key themes were identified: communication, time taken to complete tasks, clinical workflow, and workarounds. Within each theme, study findings differed as to whether the effects of eP on HCPs' working practices were positive or negative. CONCLUSION:There is a lack of consensus within the literature on the impact of eP on HCPs' working practices. Future research should explore the strategies resulting in a positive impact on HCPs' working practices and learn from those that have not been successful.

SUBMITTER: Mohsin-Shaikh S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6806498 | biostudies-other | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of electronic prescribing systems on healthcare professionals' working practices in the hospital setting: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Mohsin-Shaikh Soomal S Furniss Dominic D Blandford Ann A McLeod Monsey M Ma Tiantian T Beykloo Maedeh Y MY Franklin Bryony Dean BD

BMC health services research 20191022 1

<h4>Background</h4>The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise peer-reviewed literature assessing the impact of electronic prescribing (eP) systems on the working practices of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the inpatient setting and identify implications for practice and research.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane and the Cumulative Index to Nursing Allied Health Literature databases for studies published from inception to November 2018. We included control ...[more]

PMID: 31640689

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimTo evaluate neonatal and paediatric life support training practices across Europe.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive study. Paediatric residents, general paediatricians, and subspecialists were surveyed to assess how paediatric basic and advanced life support (PBLS/PALS) and neonatal life support (NLS) are practically arranged and utilised throughout Europe. A mini-Delphi approach was used for survey development. Eligible professionals in general and university hospitals received a web link to the survey.Results498 respondents from 16 countries were included. A large majority of responses came from the Netherlands (n = 393) and Belgium (n = 42). Therefore, analysis was based on these responses. PBLS was more frequently offered than PALS and NLS, though not to all professionals caring for children. For PBLS, PALS, and NLS, official recertification varied between 35-75%. Approximately 80-90% had read the latest guidelines, at least partially. Sixty to seventy percent felt capable of instant PALS, 75-90% considered themselves able to perform PBLS and NLS instantly. Not reading the guidelines and less confidence about instant resuscitation seemed to occur more often in the lower and higher age/experience groups compared to the intermediate age/experience groups. A quarter of the respondents <30 years did not feel prepared for instant PALS. General paediatricians appeared to feel most capable of instant resuscitation. General and university hospitals had rather similar training practices and facilities. Manikins were predominantly low-fidelity, especially in general hospitals. Barriers to course participation were high costs, lack of time, the non-compulsory status, remote location, and unavailability of courses.ConclusionAlthough most paediatric professionals receive life support training, guideline reading, recertification, training utilisation, and resuscitation preparedness require improvement. Barriers to course participation should be addressed.

Project description:Electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) has the potential to improve the safety and efficiency of medication use, but uptake of e-prescribing in community-based settings has been limited to date. In April 2004, 2 large insurers in Massachusetts began a program to fund e-prescribing systems for targeted clinicians and practices. We studied the adoption and uptake of e-prescribing by the targeted prescribers.We obtained data on all e-prescriptions written from April 2004 to March 2005. We tabulated the number of clinicians using the e-prescribing system and the number of prescriptions written. We also obtained claims data from the 2 insurance companies and calculated the proportion of each clinician's prescriptions that were written electronically. We developed multivariable models to estimate the impact of different clinician characteristics on the proportional rate of e-prescribing.During the first 12 months of the e-prescribing program, 1,217 prescribers began using the e-prescribing system. In the final month of the study, over 55,000 e-prescriptions were written for patients covered by the 2 included insurance plans. The proportion of total reimbursed claims per clinician written electronically increased slowly during the study period and was still below 30% by the end of the study period. This number increased to 42% when we restricted the sample to medications normally used for acute indications. Multivariable models showed that younger clinicians, pediatricians, and prescribers in larger practices exhibited higher uptake rates as a proportion of total prescriptions.Clinician use of e-prescribing increased steadily in the first 12 months of an initiative sponsoring e-prescribing systems. Uptake of e-prescribing was only partial, with younger clinicians and pediatricians more likely to use the system. Research to understand why prescribers vary in their use of e-prescribing and to develop techniques to encourage more wide-spread adoption will be an important priority for future studies.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Considerable investments are being made in commercial electronic prescribing systems (e-prescribing) in many countries. Few studies have measured or evaluated their effectiveness at reducing prescribing error rates, and interactions between system design and errors are not well understood, despite increasing concerns regarding new errors associated with system use. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two commercial e-prescribing systems in reducing prescribing error rates and their propensities for introducing new types of error. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a before and after study involving medication chart audit of 3,291 admissions (1,923 at baseline and 1,368 post e-prescribing system) at two Australian teaching hospitals. In Hospital A, the Cerner Millennium e-prescribing system was implemented on one ward, and three wards, which did not receive the e-prescribing system, acted as controls. In Hospital B, the iSoft MedChart system was implemented on two wards and we compared before and after error rates. Procedural (e.g., unclear and incomplete prescribing orders) and clinical (e.g., wrong dose, wrong drug) errors were identified. Prescribing error rates per admission and per 100 patient days; rates of serious errors (5-point severity scale, those ?3 were categorised as serious) by hospital and study period; and rates and categories of postintervention "system-related" errors (where system functionality or design contributed to the error) were calculated. Use of an e-prescribing system was associated with a statistically significant reduction in error rates in all three intervention wards (respectively reductions of 66.1% [95% CI 53.9%-78.3%]; 57.5% [33.8%-81.2%]; and 60.5% [48.5%-72.4%]). The use of the system resulted in a decline in errors at Hospital A from 6.25 per admission (95% CI 5.23-7.28) to 2.12 (95% CI 1.71-2.54; p<0.0001) and at Hospital B from 3.62 (95% CI 3.30-3.93) to 1.46 (95% CI 1.20-1.73; p<0.0001). This decrease was driven by a large reduction in unclear, illegal, and incomplete orders. The Hospital A control wards experienced no significant change (respectively -12.8% [95% CI -41.1% to 15.5%]; -11.3% [-40.1% to 17.5%]; -20.1% [-52.2% to 12.4%]). There was limited change in clinical error rates, but serious errors decreased by 44% (0.25 per admission to 0.14; p?=?0.0002) across the intervention wards compared to the control wards (17% reduction; 0.30-0.25; p?=?0.40). Both hospitals experienced system-related errors (0.73 and 0.51 per admission), which accounted for 35% of postsystem errors in the intervention wards; each system was associated with different types of system-related errors. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of these commercial e-prescribing systems resulted in statistically significant reductions in prescribing error rates. Reductions in clinical errors were limited in the absence of substantial decision support, but a statistically significant decline in serious errors was observed. System-related errors require close attention as they are frequent, but are potentially remediable by system redesign and user training. Limitations included a lack of control wards at Hospital B and an inability to randomize wards to the intervention.

Project description:The prescription of opioid analgesics by dental professionals is widespread in the United States. Policy makers, government agencies, and professional organizations consider this phenomenon a growing public health concern. This study examined trends in the prescription of opioid analgesics for adults by dental professionals and associated factors in the United States. Data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (1996-2013) were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were calculated separately for each year. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to estimate the overall trend during the period with and without adjusting for dental procedures and personal characteristics. Survey weights were incorporated to handle the sampling design. The prescription of opioid analgesics following dental care increased over time. After adjusting for sociodemographic factors, source of payment, and type of dental procedure, the odds ratio (OR) of prescribing opioid analgesics following a dental visit per each decade difference was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.38). Surgical, root canal, and implant procedures had the highest rates of opioid prescriptions and the greatest increases in rates over the study period. After adjusting for personal characteristics and type of dental procedure, the OR of receiving a prescription for opioids comparing blacks, Asians, and Hispanics to whites was 1.29 (95% CI, 1.17-1.41), 0.57 (95% CI, 0.47-0.70), and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75-0.95), respectively. Opioid analgesic prescriptions following dental visits increased over time after adjusting for personal characteristics and type of dental procedure. The odds of receiving a prescription for opioids were higher for certain racial/ethnic minority groups. Knowledge Transfer Statement: This study highlights dental professionals prescribing practices of opioid analgesics by following dental treatments in the United States. With this knowledge, appropriate guidelines, protocols, and policies can be developed and implemented to address any inappropriate prescribing practices of opioid analgesics. In addition, this information could lead to an improvement in the prescribing practices of dental professionals and to evidence-based therapeutic decision making.

Project description:BackgroundCanadians seeking medical cannabis (MC) may encounter difficulties in finding a healthcare provider (HCP) who authorizes their access to it. Barriers that HCPs face in authorizing MC are unclear. The objectives of this study were to evaluate HCP opinions, knowledge, comfort, and practice in MC prescribing and counseling on recreational cannabis use, and whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected MC prescribing practices.MethodsEligible participants included HCPs (e.g., attending physicians, nurses, pharmacists) in Canada. A questionnaire evaluating their knowledge, comfort, and practice in medical and recreational cannabis was designed based on instruments developed in previous studies. Between April 13th-December 13th 2021, ninety-one healthcare associations were asked to distribute the survey to their members, and an advertisement was placed in the online Canadian Medical Association Journal. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results.ResultsTwenty-four organizations agreed to disseminate the survey and 70 individuals completed it. Of respondents, 71% were attending physicians or medical residents, while the remainder were nurses, pharmacists or other HCPs. Almost none (6%) received training in MC in professional school but 60% did receive other training (e.g., workshops, conferences). Over half (57%) received more questions regarding MC since recreational cannabis was legalized, and 82% reported having patients who use MC. However, 56% felt uncomfortable or ambivalent regarding their knowledge of MC, and 27% were unfamiliar with the requirements for obtaining MC in Canada. The most common symptoms for recommending MC were pain and nausea, whereas the most common conditions for recommending it were cancer and intractable pain. The strongest barrier to authorizing MC was uncertainty in safe and effective dosage and routes of administration. The strongest barrier to recommending or authorizing MC was the lack of research evidence demonstrating its safety and efficacy. During the pandemic, many respondents reported that a greater number of their patients used cannabis to relieve anxiety and depression.ConclusionsOur results suggest that HCPs across Canada who responded to our survey are unfamiliar with topics related to MC. The strongest barriers appear to be lack of clinical research, and uncertainty in safe and effective MC administration. Increasing research, training, and knowledge may help HCPs feel more equipped to make informed treatment/prescribing decisions, which may help to improve access to MC.

Project description:Although electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) holds promise for preventing prescription errors in the ambulatory setting, research on its effectiveness is inconclusive.To assess the impact of a stand-alone e-prescribing system on the rates and types of ambulatory prescribing errors.Prospective, non-randomized study using pre-post design of 15 providers who adopted e-prescribing with concurrent controls of 15 paper-based providers from September 2005 through June 2007.Use of a commercial, stand-alone e-prescribing system with clinical decision support including dosing recommendations and checks for drug-allergy interactions, drug-drug interactions, and duplicate therapies.Prescribing errors were identified by a standardized prescription and chart review.We analyzed 3684 paper-based prescriptions at baseline and 3848 paper-based and electronic prescriptions at one year of follow-up. For e-prescribing adopters, error rates decreased nearly sevenfold, from 42.5 per 100 prescriptions (95% confidence interval (CI), 36.7-49.3) at baseline to 6.6 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 5.1-8.3) one year after adoption (p < 0.001). For non-adopters, error rates remained high at 37.3 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 27.6-50.2) at baseline and 38.4 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 27.4-53.9) at one year (p = 0.54). At one year, the error rate for e-prescribing adopters was significantly lower than for non-adopters (p < 0.001). Illegibility errors were very high at baseline and were completely eliminated by e-prescribing (87.6 per 100 prescriptions at baseline for e-prescribing adopters, 0 at one year).Prescribing errors may occur much more frequently in community-based practices than previously reported. Our preliminary findings suggest that stand-alone e-prescribing with clinical decision support may significantly improve ambulatory medication safety.ClinicalTrials.gov, Taconic Health Information Network and Community (THINC), NCT00225563, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00225563?term=Kaushal&rank=6 .

Dataset Information

The impact of electronic prescribing systems on healthcare professionals' working practices in the hospital setting: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Publications

The impact of electronic prescribing systems on healthcare professionals' working practices in the hospital setting: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets