Department of Biomedical and Health Informatics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Department of Infection Prevention and Control, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Oct;9(4):791-802. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1675179. Epub 2018 Oct 24.
Surveillance for surgical site infections (SSIs) after ambulatory surgery in children requires a detailed manual chart review to assess criteria defined by the National Health and Safety Network (NHSN). Electronic health records (EHRs) impose an inefficient search process where infection preventionists must manually review every postsurgical encounter (< 30 days). Using text mining and business intelligence software, we developed an information foraging application, the SSI Workbench, to visually present which postsurgical encounters included SSI-related terms and synonyms, antibiotic, and culture orders.
This article compares the Workbench and EHR on four dimensions: (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) workload, and (4) usability.
Comparative usability test of Workbench and EHR. Objective test metrics are time per case, encounters reviewed per case, time per encounter, and retrieval of information meeting NHSN definitions. Subjective measures are cognitive load using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index (NASA TLX), and a questionnaire on system usability and utility.
Eight infection preventionists participated in the test. There was no difference in effectiveness as subjects retrieved information from all cases, using both systems, to meet the NHSN criteria. There was no difference in efficiency in time per case between the Workbench and EHR (8.58 vs. 7.39 minutes, = 0.36). However, with the Workbench subjects opened fewer encounters per case (3.0 vs. 7.5, = 0.002), spent more time per encounter (2.23 vs. 0.92 minutes, = 0.002), rated the Workbench lower in cognitive load (NASA TLX, 24 vs. 33, = 0.02), and significantly higher in measures of usability.
Compared with the EHR, the Workbench was more usable, short, and reduced cognitive load. In overall efficiency, the Workbench did not save time, but demonstrated a shift from between-encounter foraging to within-encounter foraging and was rated as significantly more efficient. Our results suggest that infection surveillance can be better supported by systems applying information foraging theory.
儿童门诊手术后的手术部位感染(SSI)监测需要详细的手动图表审查,以评估国家卫生和安全网络(NHSN)定义的标准。电子健康记录(EHR)的搜索过程效率低下,感染预防人员必须手动审查每一次术后就诊(<30 天)。我们使用文本挖掘和商业智能软件开发了一种信息搜索应用程序,即 SSI 工作台,以直观地显示哪些术后就诊包含与 SSI 相关的术语和同义词、抗生素和培养订单。
本文从四个方面比较了工作台和 EHR:(1)有效性,(2)效率,(3)工作量和(4)可用性。
工作台和 EHR 的对比可用性测试。客观测试指标是每个病例的时间、每个病例审查的就诊次数、每次就诊的时间和检索符合 NHSN 定义的信息。主观测量是使用美国国家航空航天局(NASA)任务负荷指数(NASA TLX)的认知负荷,以及关于系统可用性和实用性的问卷。
八名感染预防人员参加了测试。在使用两种系统检索所有病例信息以满足 NHSN 标准方面,效果没有差异。在每个病例的时间效率方面,工作台和 EHR 之间没有差异(8.58 分钟对 7.39 分钟, = 0.36)。然而,使用工作台,每个病例的就诊次数减少(3.0 次对 7.5 次, = 0.002),每次就诊的时间增加(2.23 分钟对 0.92 分钟, = 0.002),认知负荷的评分较低(NASA TLX,24 对 33, = 0.02),可用性的评分显著较高。
与 EHR 相比,工作台更易用、更简洁,并降低了认知负荷。在整体效率方面,工作台并没有节省时间,但表现出从就诊间搜索到就诊内搜索的转变,并被评为更有效率。我们的结果表明,应用信息搜索理论的系统可以更好地支持感染监测。