Healthc Inform Res.  2013 Jun;19(2):93-101. 10.4258/hir.2013.19.2.93.

Role of Computerized Physician Order Entry Usability in the Reduction of Prescribing Errors

• Peikari HR
• Zakaria MS
• Yasin NM
• Shah MH
• Elhissi A

• KMID: 2229490
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2013.19.2.93

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
Some hospitals have implemented computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems to reduce the medical error rates. However, research in this area has been very limited, especially regarding the impact of CPOE use on the reduction of prescribing errors. Moreover, the past studies have dealt with the overall impact of CPOE on the reduction of broadly termed "medical errors", and they have not specified which medical errors have been reduced by CPOE. Furthermore, the majority of the past research in this field has been either qualitative or has not used robust empirical techniques. This research examined the impacts of usability of CPOE systems on the reduction of doctors' prescribing errors.
METHODS
One hundred and sixty-six questionnaires were used for quantitative data analyses. Since the data was not normally distributed, partial least square path modelling-as the second generation of multivariate data analyses-was applied to analyze data.
RESULTS
It was found that the ease of use of the system and information quality can significantly reduce prescribing errors. Moreover, the user interface consistency and system error prevention have a significant positive impact on the perceived ease of use. More than 50% of the respondents believed that CPOE reduces the likelihood of drug allergy, drug interaction, and drug dosing errors thus improving patient safety.
CONCLUSIONS
Prescribing errors in terms of drug allergy, drug interaction, and drug dosing errors are reduced if the CPOE is not error-prone and easy to use, if the user interface is consistent, and if it provides quality information to doctors.

Keyword

Medical; Usability; Health Informatics; CPOE

MeSH Terms

Drug Hypersensitivity
Drug Interactions
Humans
Medical Errors
Medical Order Entry Systems
Statistics as Topic
Surveys and Questionnaires

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 The results of the hypotheses. **p < 0.01.

Reference

1. Blaser R, Schnabel M, Biber C, Baumlein M, Heger O, Beyer M, et al. Improving pathway compliance and clinician performance by using information technology. Int J Med Inform. 2007; 76(2-3):151–156.

2. Bates DW, Cohen M, Leape LL, Overhage JM, Shabot MM, Sheridan T. Reducing the frequency of errors in medicine using information technology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001; 8(4):299–308.

3. Bosman RJ. Impact of computerized information systems on workload in operating room and intensive care unit. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2009; 23(1):15–26.

4. Zhang J, Johnson TR, Patel VL, Paige DL, Kubose T. Using usability heuristics to evaluate patient safety of medical devices. J Biomed Inform. 2003; 36(1-2):23–30.

5. Blendon RJ, DesRoches CM, Brodie M, Benson JM, Rosen AB, Schneider E, et al. Views of practicing physicians and the public on medical errors. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347(24):1933–1940.

6. Effken JA, Loeb RG, Kang Y, Lin ZC. Clinical information displays to improve ICU outcomes. Int J Med Inform. 2008; 77(11):765–777.

7. Lee DH, Lee SM, Schniederjans MJ. Medical error reduction: the effect of employee satisfaction with organizational support. Serv Ind J. 2001; 31(8):1311–1325.

8. Holden RJ. Physicians' beliefs about using EMR and CPOE: in pursuit of a contextualized understanding of health IT use behavior. Int J Med Inform. 2010; 79(2):71–80.

9. Eslami S, de Keizer NF, Abu-Hanna A. The impact of computerized physician medication order entry in hospitalized patients; a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2008; 77(6):365–376.

10. Oztekin A, Nikov A, Zaim S. UWIS: an assessment methodology for usability of Web-based information systems. J Syst Softw. 2009; 82(12):2038–2050.

11. Han YY, Carcillo JA, Venkataraman ST, Clark RS, Watson RS, Nguyen TC, et al. Unexpected increased mortality after implementation of a commercially sold computerized physician order entry system. Pediatrics. 2005; 116(6):1506–1512.

12. Maenpaa T, Suominen T, Asikainen P, Maass M, Rostila I. The outcomes of regional healthcare information systems in health care: a review of the research literature. Int J Med Inform. 2009; 78(11):757–771.

13. Venkatesh V, Zhang X, Sykes TA. "Doctors do too little technology": a longitudinal field study of an electronic healthcare system implementation. Inf Syst Res. 2011; 22(3):523–546.

14. Reckmann MH, Westbrook JI, Koh Y, Lo C, Day RO. Does computerized provider order entry reduce prescribing errors for hospital inpatients? A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009; 16(5):613–623.

15. Nahm ES, Vaydia V, Ho D, Scharf B, Seagull J. Outcomes assessment of clinical information system implementation: a practical guide. Nurs Outlook. 2007; 55(6):282–288.

16. Oztekin A, Kong ZJ, Uysal O. UseLearn: a novel checklist and usability evaluation method for eLearning systems by criticality metric analysis. Int J Ind Ergon. 2010; 40(4):455–469.

17. Weir CR, Staggers N, Laukert T. Reviewing the impact of computerized provider order entry on clinical outcomes: the quality of systematic reviews. Int J Med Inform. 2012; 81(4):219–231.

18. Amarasingham R, Plantinga L, Diener-West M, Gaskin DJ, Powe NR. Clinical information technologies and inpatient outcomes: a multiple hospital study. Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(2):108–114.

19. Corrao NJ, Robinson AG, Swiernik MA, Naeim A. Importance of testing for usability when selecting and implementing an electronic health or medical record system. J Oncol Pract. 2010; 6(3):120–124.

20. Su KW, Liu CL. A mobile Nursing Information System based on human-computer interaction design for improving quality of nursing. J Med Syst. 2012; 36(3):1139–1153.

21. Babaei M, Ganjalikhani M. Medical informatics: on an ongoing road to final destination. Sri Lanka J Biomed Inform. 2010; 1(3):186–190.

22. Gonzalez M, Masip L, Granollers A, Oliva M. Quantitative analysis in a heuristic evaluation experiment. Adv Eng Softw. 2009; 40(12):1271–1278.

23. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice-Hall;2010.

24. Joshi A, Sarda NL, Tripathi S. Measuring effectiveness of HCI integration in software development processes. J Syst Softw. 2010; 83(11):2045–2058.

25. Cooper RB. Decision production: a step toward a theory of managerial information requirements. In : Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Information Systems; 1983 Dec 15-17; Houston, TX. p. 251–267.

26. Pai FY, Huang KI. Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to the introduction of healthcare information systems. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2011; 78(4):650–660.

27. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989; 13(3):319–340.

28. Chen SY, Macredie RD. The assessment of usability of electronic shopping: a heuristic evaluation. Int J Inf Manage. 2005; 25(6):516–532.

29. Despont-Gros C, Mueller H, Lovis C. Evaluating user interactions with clinical information systems: a model based on human-computer interaction models. J Biomed Inform. 2005; 38(3):244–255.

30. Thong JY, Hong W, Tam KY. Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences? Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2002; 57(3):215–242.

31. Ammenwerth E, Rauchegger F, Ehlers F, Hirsch B, Schaubmayr C. Effect of a nursing information system on the quality of information processing in nursing: an evaluation study using the HIS-monitor instrument. Int J Med Inform. 2011; 80(1):25–38.

32. Devaraj S, Kohli R. Performance impacts of information technology: is actual usage the missing link? Manage Sci. 2003; 49(3):273–289.

33. Conway JM, Lance CE. What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. J Bus Psychol. 2010; 25(3):325–334.

34. Fleenor JW, Smither JW, Atwater LE, Braddy PW, Sturm RE. Self-other rating agreement in leadership: a review. Leadersh Q. 2010; 21(6):1005–1034.

35. Hair JF, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. J Mark Theory Pract. 2011; 19(2):139–152.

36. Ahn T, Ryu S, Han I. The impact of Web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing. Inf Manag. 2007; 44(3):263–275.

37. Goetzinger L, Park J, Lee YJ, Widdows R. Value-driven consumer e-health information search behavior. Int J Pharm Healthc Mark. 2007; 1(2):128–142.

38. Kuan HH, Bock GW, Vathanophas V. Comparing the effects of Website quality on customer initial purchase and continued purchase at e-commerce Websites. Behav Inf Technol. 2008; 27(1):3–16.

39. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci. 2000; 46(2):186–204.

40. Smith RJ, Eroglu C. Assessing consumer attitudes toward off-site customer service contact methods. Int J Logist Manag. 2009; 20(2):261–267.

41. Mwachofi A, Walston SL, Al-Omar BA. Factors affecting nurses' perceptions of patient safety. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2011; 24(4):274–283.

42. Khajouei R, Wierenga PC, Hasman A, Jaspers MW. Clinicians satisfaction with CPOE ease of use and effect on clinicians' workflow, efficiency and medication safety. Int J Med Inform. 2011; 80(5):297–309.

43. Kekre S, Krishnan MS, Srinivasan K. Drivers of customer satisfaction for software products: implications for design and service support. Manage Sci. 1995; 41(9):1456–1470.

44. Lammintakanen J, Saranto K, Kivinen T. Use of electronic information systems in nursing management. Int J Med Inform. 2010; 79(5):324–331.

45. Kim J, Kim S, Jung Y, Kim EK. Status and problems of adverse event reporting systems in Korean hospitals. Healthc Inform Res. 2010; 16(3):166–176.

46. Hwang JI, Lee SI, Park HA. Barriers to the operation of patient safety incident reporting systems in Korean general hospitals. Healthc Inform Res. 2012; 18(4):279–286.