Wang C Jason, Patel Mihir H, Schueth Anthony J, Bradley Melissa, Wu Shinyi, Crosson Jesse C, Glassman Peter A, Bell Douglas S
Pediatrics and Public Health Boston University and Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 Jul-Aug;16(4):493-502. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2998. Epub 2009 Apr 23.
OBJECTIVE To compare the experiences of e-prescribing users and nonusers regarding prescription safety and workload and to assess the use of information from two e-prescribing standards (for medication history and formulary and benefit information), as they are implemented. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey of physicians who either had installed or were awaiting installation of one of two commercial e-prescribing systems. MEASUREMENTS Perceptions about medication history and formulary and benefit information among all respondents, and among e-prescribing users, experiences with system usability, job performance impact, and amount of e-prescribing. RESULTS Of 395 eligible physicians, 228 (58%) completed the survey. E-prescribers (n = 139) were more likely than non-e-prescribers (n = 89) to perceive that they could identify clinically important drug-drug interactions (83 versus 67%, p = 0.004) but not that they could identify prescriptions from other providers (65 versus 60%, p = 0.49). They also perceived no significant difference in calls about drug coverage problems (76 versus 71% reported getting 10 or fewer such calls per week; p = 0.43). Most e-prescribers reported high satisfaction with their systems, but 17% had stopped using the system and another 46% said they sometimes reverted to handwriting for prescriptions that they could write electronically. The volume of e-prescribing was correlated with perceptions that it enhanced job performance, whereas quitting was associated with perceptions of poor usability. CONCLUSIONS E-prescribing users reported patient safety benefits but they did not perceive the enhanced benefits expected from using standardized medication history or formulary and benefit information. Additional work is needed for these standards to have the desired effects.
目的 比较电子处方使用者和非使用者在处方安全性和工作量方面的体验,并评估在两个电子处方标准(用药史、处方集及医保信息)实施过程中信息的使用情况。 设计 对已安装或正在等待安装两种商用电子处方系统之一的医生进行横断面调查。 测量 所有受访者以及电子处方使用者对用药史、处方集及医保信息的认知,系统可用性体验、对工作表现的影响以及电子处方使用量。 结果 395名符合条件的医生中,228名(58%)完成了调查。电子处方使用者(n = 139)比非使用者(n = 89)更有可能认为自己能够识别具有临床意义的药物相互作用(83%对67%,p = 0.004),但在识别其他医生的处方方面两者无差异(65%对60%,p = 0.49)。他们还认为在药物医保问题的咨询方面无显著差异(76%对71%报告每周接到此类咨询10次或更少;p = 0.43)。大多数电子处方使用者对其系统高度满意,但17%已停止使用该系统,另有46%表示有时会将可电子开具的处方改为手写。电子处方量与认为其提高工作表现的认知相关,而停止使用则与对可用性差的认知相关。 结论 电子处方使用者报告了对患者安全有益,但他们并未察觉到使用标准化用药史或处方集及医保信息所带来的预期增强效益。这些标准要产生预期效果还需要进一步努力。