Article

Perceptions of Standards-based Electronic Prescribing Systems as Implemented in Outpatient Primary Care: A Physician Survey

Pediatrics and Public Health Boston University and Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (Impact Factor: 3.93). 05/2009; 16(4):493-502. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2998
Source: DBLP

ABSTRACT 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.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Jesse Crosson, Jul 05, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
80 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To describe second-generation electronic prescription (eRx) technologies and identify their impacts on the medication management process in primary care. Second-generation eRx technologies have focused on networking various stakeholders so that they can communicate electronically. METHOD: Using key words, a search was conducted of the relevant databases up to January 2011. A manual search was conducted of the bibliographies of the studies as well as the prior systematic reviews found. The tables of contents of the major periodicals in the field were also searched. This included studies of the impacts of eRx technologies that allow electronic circulation of information between prescription sites and dispensing sites, independent of the methodology used. A structured form was used to extract the data. The studies' impacts were classified by stage in the medication management process (prescription, transmission of the prescription, execution of the prescription and use of the medication). RESULTS: Nineteen observational studies were included in this review. Most of them (10/19) have evaluated users' perceptions using interviews, focus groups or questionnaires. Two technology models stand out: the push model, under which the prescriber directs the prescription toward a specific pharmacy, and the pull model, under which any authorized pharmacy can download a given prescription into its system. The push model is the most widely used, particularly in the United States. Communication between prescribers and dispensers is usually unidirectional, and communications standards have to be refined. The only demonstrated impacts of second-generation eRx technologies were found at two levels: positive impacts on the quality of the pharmacological profile available to professionals, and negative impacts on the execution of prescriptions in pharmacies. Stakeholders' perceptions were mixed and reflected considerable differences according to context, the type of technology used, the intensity of its use and its maturity. Electronic transmission of prescriptions provides a new way to monitor patient compliance. CONCLUSION: There is little empirical data demonstrating benefits to second-generation eRx technologies, even if it is a highly promoted model for improving primary care quality. More research is required, with studies that measure the impacts of second-generation technologies using empirical data and conducted in the context of actual use. Future studies should also employ the same terminology and provide full descriptions of context, type of technology and intensity of use.
    International Journal of Medical Informatics 02/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.01.012 · 2.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The practice of community pharmacists is being challenged by the appearance of electronic prescription (e-Rx) technology. This article examines the disruptions caused by e-Rx technology to the jurisdiction of community pharmacists based on a model developed from work by Abbott (1988). The main disruptions to professional activities were investigated by qualitative methods in a series of interviews with pharmacists and physicians separated in two groups: practitioners who tested a typical e-Rx technology and stakeholders involved in the implementation of this large-scale e-Rx project in Quebec, Canada. The findings suggest that the technology may disrupt the jurisdiction of community pharmacists, mainly by changing the distribution of information among physicians and community pharmacists. More specifically, the technology represents both a threat to community pharmacists - by supporting the dominant position held by physicians if it gives them access to information held exclusively by pharmacists - and an opportunity - by redistributing information to the pharmacists' benefit, allowing them to improve the quality of their inferences about medication. However, it would appear that the opportunities offered by the technology generate concerns and tensions, both between physicians and pharmacists and between the pharmacists themselves. This phenomenon may well work against the implementation and use of available tools.
    Social Science [?] Medicine 05/2011; 73(1):121-8. DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.04.009 · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To support more informed prescribing decisions, e-prescribing systems need data on patients' medication histories and their drug-specific insurance coverage. We used an expert panel process to evaluate the technical adequacy of two standards for delivering this information, the Medication History function of the NCPDP SCRIPT Standard and the NCPDP Formulary and Benefit Standard.Methods: We convened a panel representing 14 organizations that had experience with these standards. Experts within each organization submitted narrative responses and ratings assessing the standards in 6 domains, including data quality,completeness, usability, and interoperability. Areas of disagreement were discussed in recorded teleconferences. Narrative was analyzed using a grounded-theory approach. Results: Panelists agreed that the structure of the Medication History Standard was adequate for delivering accurate and complete information but implementation problems made the data difficult to use for decision support.The panel also agreed that the Formulary and Benefit Standard was adequate to deliver formulary status lists, but other parts of the standard were not used consistently and group-level variations in coverage were not represented. A common problem for both standards was the lack of unambiguous drug identifiers; panelists agreed that RxNorm deserves further evaluation as a solution to this problem.Conclusions: A panel of industry experts found the basic structure of these two standards to be technically adequate, but to enable benefits for patient care, improvements are needed in the standards' implementation.
    AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings / AMIA Symposium. AMIA Symposium 02/2008;