Impact of electronic health records on predefined safety outcomes in patients admitted to hospital: a scoping review.

Christian Peter Subbe, Genevieve Tellier, Paul Barach
Author Information
  1. Christian Peter Subbe: School of Medical Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK csubbe@hotmail.com. ORCID
  2. Genevieve Tellier: Medicine, Ysbyty Gwynedd, Bangor, UK.
  3. Paul Barach: Pediatrics, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA. ORCID

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Review available evidence for impact of electronic health records (EHRs) on predefined patient safety outcomes in interventional studies to identify gaps in current knowledge and design interventions for future research.
DESIGN: Scoping review to map existing evidence and identify gaps for future research.
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Trial registers.
STUDY SELECTION: Eligibility criteria: We conducted a scoping review of bibliographic databases and the grey literature of randomised and non-randomised trials describing interventions targeting a list of fourteen predefined areas of safety. The search was limited to manuscripts published between January 2008 and December 2018 of studies in adult inpatient settings and complemented by a targeted search for studies using a sample of EHR vendors. Studies were categorised according to methodology, intervention characteristics and safety outcome.Results from identified studies were grouped around common themes of safety measures.
RESULTS: The search yielded 583 articles of which 24 articles were included. The identified studies were largely from US academic medical centres, heterogeneous in study conduct, definitions, treatment protocols and study outcome reporting. Of the 24 included studies effective safety themes included medication reconciliation, decision support for prescribing medications, communication between teams, infection prevention and measures of EHR-specific harm. Heterogeneity of the interventions and study characteristics precluded a systematic meta-analysis. Most studies reported process measures and not patient-level safety outcomes: We found no or limited evidence in 13 of 14 predefined safety areas, with good evidence limited to medication safety.
CONCLUSIONS: Published evidence for EHR impact on safety outcomes from interventional studies is limited and does not permit firm conclusions regarding the full safety impact of EHRs or support recommendations about ideal design features. The review highlights the need for greater transparency in quality assurance of existing EHRs and further research into suitable metrics and study designs.

Keywords

References

  1. Appl Clin Inform. 2010 Dec 08;1(4):462-5 [PMID: 23616854]
  2. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 Mar-Apr;20(2):305-10 [PMID: 22753810]
  3. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Aug 21;264:753-757 [PMID: 31438025]
  4. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Jul-Aug;19(4):615-20 [PMID: 22174327]
  5. J Thromb Haemost. 2010 Jun;8(6):1230-4 [PMID: 20175871]
  6. Lancet. 2015 May 16;385(9981):1966-74 [PMID: 25726515]
  7. Crit Care. 2017 Mar 14;21(1):52 [PMID: 28288655]
  8. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011 Jan;66(1):205-9 [PMID: 21059617]
  9. Arch Intern Med. 2009 Apr 27;169(8):771-80 [PMID: 19398689]
  10. J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Nov;15(11):2138-2146 [PMID: 28836340]
  11. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Apr 1;24(e1):e191-e193 [PMID: 27572813]
  12. Am J Infect Control. 2017 Mar 1;45(3):333-335 [PMID: 27919427]
  13. Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 20;8:70 [PMID: 23786847]
  14. Crit Care Med. 2013 Nov;41(11):2563-9 [PMID: 23939354]
  15. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Aug;26(8):868-74 [PMID: 21499828]
  16. J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Apr;23(4):489-94 [PMID: 18373151]
  17. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Sep 1;25(9):1197-1201 [PMID: 29982549]
  18. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2013 Oct 01;10:1c [PMID: 24159271]
  19. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020 Mar;26(2):345-350 [PMID: 31046608]
  20. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Dec;26(12):993-1003 [PMID: 28821597]
  21. Eval Health Prof. 2013 Jun;36(2):135-62 [PMID: 22976126]
  22. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005 Sep-Oct;12(5):505-16 [PMID: 15905487]
  23. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012 May;21(5):369-80 [PMID: 22421911]
  24. Crit Care. 2006 Feb;10(1):R21 [PMID: 16469126]
  25. Future Healthc J. 2019 Feb;6(1):52-56 [PMID: 31098587]
  26. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Feb 5;170(3):216-217 [PMID: 30716744]
  27. J Nurs Adm. 2011 Nov;41(11):466-72 [PMID: 22033316]
  28. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017 Sep;11(5):1028-1035 [PMID: 28290224]
  29. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Dec;67(12):1291-4 [PMID: 25034198]
  30. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Nov 1;24(6):1095-1101 [PMID: 28505367]
  31. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 Nov-Dec;20(6):1159-67 [PMID: 23721982]
  32. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Jul 22;5(7): [PMID: 27451467]
  33. J Trauma Nurs. 2015 Sep-Oct;22(5):255-60 [PMID: 26352656]
  34. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 19;18(1):143 [PMID: 30453902]
  35. Acute Med. 2020;19(3):116-117 [PMID: 33020753]
  36. Crit Care Resusc. 2011 Dec;13(4):281-2; author reply 283-4 [PMID: 22129292]
  37. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019 Feb 8;76(Supplement_1):S1-S8 [PMID: 30753316]
  38. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 Jul 1;25(7):848-854 [PMID: 29688461]
  39. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Dec;26(12):987-992 [PMID: 28784841]
  40. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Jul 1;24(4):729-736 [PMID: 28339642]
  41. PLoS Med. 2012 Jan;9(1):e1001164 [PMID: 22303286]
  42. Health Aff (Millwood). 2018 Jul;37(7):1128-1135 [PMID: 29985687]
  43. JAMA. 2019 Apr 9;321(14):1345-1346 [PMID: 30901023]
  44. Acute Med. 2020;19(3):131-137 [PMID: 33020756]
  45. Circulation. 1996 Nov 1;94(9):2341-50 [PMID: 8901709]
  46. ACP J Club. 1995 Nov-Dec;123(3):A12-3 [PMID: 7582737]
  47. J Comorb. 2011 Dec 27;1:28-44 [PMID: 29090134]
  48. Med J Aust. 2013 Mar 4;198(4):205 [PMID: 23451964]
  49. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010 Oct;19(5):452-61 [PMID: 20457733]
  50. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Feb 1;26(2):106-114 [PMID: 30517663]
  51. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 May;23(3):609-16 [PMID: 26615182]
  52. J Healthc Risk Manag. 2013;33(2):21-6 [PMID: 24078205]
  53. BMJ. 2010 Aug 27;341:c4413 [PMID: 20802000]
  54. Med Care. 2013 Mar;51(3 Suppl 1):S52-6 [PMID: 23407012]
  55. Am J Med. 2014 Mar;127(3):226-32 [PMID: 24342543]
  56. BMJ. 2016 Jul 28;354:i3835 [PMID: 27471242]
  57. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;216:55-9 [PMID: 26262009]
  58. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2019 Nov;45(11):757-762 [PMID: 31526711]
  59. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013 Dec;34(12):1259-65 [PMID: 24225610]
  60. Int J Med Inform. 2017 Jan;97:139-144 [PMID: 27919373]
  61. Milbank Q. 2011 Jun;89(2):167-205 [PMID: 21676020]
  62. Crit Care Resusc. 2011 Jun;13(2):83-8 [PMID: 21627575]
  63. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2019 Nov;45(11):750-756 [PMID: 31474516]
  64. PLoS Med. 2011 Jan 18;8(1):e1000387 [PMID: 21267058]
  65. JAMA. 2019 May 14;321(18):1780-1787 [PMID: 31087021]
  66. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020 Jun;26(4):787-793 [PMID: 31483749]
  67. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Mar;23(3):196-205 [PMID: 23813211]
  68. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2016;225:828-9 [PMID: 27332363]
  69. JMIR Med Inform. 2017 Aug 29;5(3):e26 [PMID: 28851681]
  70. BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 29;6(9):e012555 [PMID: 27687901]
  71. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Jul;24(7):417-22 [PMID: 26092566]
  72. BMJ Open. 2014 Sep 08;4(9):e006021 [PMID: 25200561]
  73. PLoS One. 2019 Feb 25;14(2):e0212816 [PMID: 30802267]
  74. Yearb Med Inform. 2016 Nov 10;(1):7-12 [PMID: 27830226]

MeSH Term

Adult
Electronic Health Records
Hospitalization
Hospitals
Humans
Inpatients
Outcome Assessment, Health Care
Patient Safety

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0safetystudieshealthevidencepredefinedreviewlimitedstudyimpactEHRsoutcomesinterventionsresearchsearchmeasuresincludedelectronicrecordsinterventionalidentifygapsdesignfutureexistingscopingareasEHRcharacteristicsoutcomeidentifiedthemesarticles24medicationsupportqualityOBJECTIVES:ReviewavailablepatientcurrentknowledgeDESIGN:ScopingmapDATASOURCES:PubMedCochraneLibraryEMBASETrialregistersSTUDYSELECTION:Eligibilitycriteria:conductedbibliographicdatabasesgreyliteraturerandomisednon-randomisedtrialsdescribingtargetinglistfourteenmanuscriptspublishedJanuary2008December2018adultinpatientsettingscomplementedtargetedusingsamplevendorsStudiescategorisedaccordingmethodologyinterventionResultsgroupedaroundcommonRESULTS:yielded583largelyUSacademicmedicalcentresheterogeneousconductdefinitionstreatmentprotocolsreportingeffectivereconciliationdecisionprescribingmedicationscommunicationteamsinfectionpreventionEHR-specificharmHeterogeneityprecludedsystematicmeta-analysisreportedprocesspatient-leveloutcomes:found1314goodCONCLUSIONS:PublishedpermitfirmconclusionsregardingfullrecommendationsidealfeatureshighlightsneedgreatertransparencyassurancesuitablemetricsdesignsImpactpatientsadmittedhospital:&informaticspolicycareriskmanagement

Similar Articles

Cited By (10)