使用计算机化医嘱录入系统时，患者身份验证的比率存在差异。
Varying rates of patient identity verification when using computerized provider order entry.
机构信息
Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
MedStar Health National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, Washington, DC, USA.
出版信息
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Jun 1;27(6):924-928. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa047.
OBJECTIVE
We sought to determine rates of computerized provider order entry (CPOE) patient identity verification and when and where in the ordering process verification occurred.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Fifty-five physicians from 4 healthcare systems completed simulated patient scenarios using their respective CPOE system (Epic or Cerner). Eye movements were recorded and analyzed.
RESULTS
Across all participants patient id was verified significantly more often than not (62.4% vs 37.6%). Vendor A had significantly higher verification rates than not; vendor B had no difference. Participants using vendor A verified information significantly more often before signing the order than after (88.4% vs 11.6%); there was no difference in vendor B. The banner bar was the most frequent verification location.
DISCUSSION
Factors such as CPOE design, physician training, and the use of a simulated methodology may be impacting verification rates.
CONCLUSIONS
Verification rates vary by CPOE product, and this can have patient safety consequences.
目的
我们旨在确定计算机化医嘱录入（CPOE）患者身份验证的比率，以及验证发生在医嘱录入过程中的时间和地点。
材料与方法
来自 4 个医疗系统的 55 名医生使用各自的 CPOE 系统（Epic 或 Cerner）完成了模拟患者场景。记录并分析了眼动。
结果
在所有参与者中，患者 ID 的验证频率明显高于不验证（62.4%比 37.6%）。供应商 A 的验证率明显高于不验证；供应商 B 则没有差异。使用供应商 A 的参与者在签署医嘱之前验证信息的频率明显高于之后（88.4%比 11.6%）；在供应商 B 则没有差异。横幅栏是最常见的验证位置。
讨论
CPOE 设计、医生培训和模拟方法的使用等因素可能会影响验证率。
结论
CPOE 产品的验证率存在差异，这可能会对患者安全产生影响。
Zotero 插件