Clement J. McDonald

Protocol-Based Computer Reminders, the Quality of Care and the Non-Perfectibility of Man

To determine whether clinical errors can be reduced by prospective computer suggestions about the management of simple clinical events, I studied the responses of nine physicians to computer suggestions generated by 390 protocols in a controlled crossover design. These protocols dealt primarily with conditions managed (e.g., elevated blood pressure) or caused (e.g., liver toxicity) by drugs. Physicians responded to 51 per cent of 327 events when given, and 22 per cent of 385 events when not given computer suggestions. Neither level of postgraduate training (first-year postgraduate or third-year post-graduate) nor the order in which physicians served as study and control subjects had statistically significant overall effect on the results. It appears that the prospective reminders do reduce errors, and that many of these errors are probably due to mans limitations as a data processor rather than to correctable human deficiencies.

Reminders to physicians from an introspective computer medical record: a two-year randomized trial

We developed a computer-stored medical record system containing a limited set of the total clinical data base--primarily diagnostic studies and treatments. This system responds to its own content according to physician-authored reminder rules. To determine the effect of the reminder messages generated by 1490 rules on physician behavior, we randomly assigned practitioners in a general medicine clinic to study or control groups. The computer found indications for six different actions per patient in 12 467 patients during a 2-year study: 61 study group residents who received computer reminders responded to 49% of these indications; 54 control group residents, to only 29% (p less than 0.0001). Preventive care (occult blood testing, mammographic screening, weight reduction diets, influenza and pneumococcal vaccines) was affected. The intentions of the study group to use a given action for an indication predicted their response to the indications (p less than 0.03, r2 = 0.33). The intentions of the control residents did not.

The Regenstrief Medical Record System: a quarter century experience

Entrusted with the records for more than 1.5 million patients, the Regenstrief Medical Record System (RMRS) has evolved into a fast and comprehensive data repository used extensively at three hospitals on the Indiana University Medical Center campus and more than 30 Indianapolis clinics. The RMRS routinely captures laboratory results, narrative reports, orders, medications, radiology reports, registration information, nursing assessments, vital signs, EKGs and other clinical data. In this paper, we describe the RMRS data model, file structures and architecture, as well as recent necessary changes to these as we coordinate a collaborative effort among all major Indianapolis hospital systems, improving patient care by capturing city-wide laboratory and encounter data. We believe that our success represents persistent efforts to build interfaces directly to multiple independent instruments and other data collection systems, using medical standards such as HL7, LOINC, and DICOM. Inpatient and outpatient order entry systems, instruments for visit notes and on-line questionnaires that replace hardcopy forms, and intelligent use of coded data entry supplement the RMRS. Physicians happily enter orders, problems, allergies, visit notes, and discharge summaries into our locally developed Gopher order entry system, as we provide them with convenient output forms, choice lists, defaults, templates, reminders, drug interaction information, charge information, and on-line articles and textbooks. To prepare for the future, we have begun wrapping our system in Web browser technology, testing voice dictation and understanding, and employing wireless technology.

A Randomized Trial of “Corollary Orders” to Prevent Errors of Omission

OBJECTIVE Errors of omission are a common cause of systems failures. Physicians often fail to order tests or treatments needed to monitor/ameliorate the effects of other tests or treatments. The authors hypothesized that automated, guideline-based reminders to physicians, provided as they wrote orders, could reduce these omissions. DESIGN The study was performed on the inpatient general medicine ward of a public teaching hospital. Faculty and housestaff from the Indiana University School of Medicine, who used computer workstations to write orders, were randomized to intervention and control groups. As intervention physicians wrote orders for 1 of 87 selected tests or treatments, the computer suggested corollary orders needed to detect or ameliorate adverse reactions to the trigger orders. The physicians could accept or reject these suggestions. RESULTS During the 6-month trial, reminders about corollary orders were presented to 48 intervention physicians and withheld from 41 control physicians. Intervention physicians ordered the suggested corollary orders in 46.3% of instances when they received a reminder, compared with 21.9% compliance by control physicians (p < 0.0001). Physicians discriminated in their acceptance of suggested orders, readily accepting some while rejecting others. There were one third fewer interventions initiated by pharmacists with physicians in the intervention than control groups. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that physician workstations, linked to a comprehensive electronic medical record, can be an efficient means for decreasing errors of omissions and improving adherence to practice guidelines.

The effect on test ordering of informing physicians of the charges for outpatient diagnostic tests.

We studied the effect of informing physicians of the charges for outpatient diagnostic tests on their ordering of such tests in an academic primary care medical practice. All tests were ordered at microcomputer workstations by 121 physicians. For half (the intervention group), the charge for the test being ordered and the total charge for tests for that patient on that day were displayed on the computer screen. The remaining physicians (control group) also used the computers but received no message about charges. The primary outcomes measured were the number of tests ordered and the charges for tests per patient visit. In the 14 weeks before the study, the number of tests ordered and the average charge for tests per patient visit were similar for the intervention and control groups. During the 26-week intervention period, the physicians in the intervention group ordered 14 percent fewer tests per patient visit than did those in the control group (P less than 0.005), and the charges for tests were 13 percent (

The Barriers to Electronic Medical Record Systems and How to Overcome Them

6.68 per visit) lower (P less than 0.05). The differences were greater for scheduled visits (17 percent fewer tests and 15 percent lower charges for the intervention group; P less than 0.01) than for unscheduled (urgent) visits (11 percent fewer tests and 10 percent lower charges; P greater than 0.3). During the 19 weeks after the intervention ended, the number of tests ordered by the physicians in the intervention group was only 7.7 percent lower than the number ordered by the physicians in the control group, and the charges for tests were only 3.5 percent lower (P greater than 0.3). Three measures of possible adverse outcomes--number of hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and outpatient visits during the study period and the following six months--were similar for the patients seen by the physicians in both groups. We conclude that displaying the charges for diagnostic tests significantly reduced the number and cost of tests ordered, especially for patients with scheduled visits. The effects of this intervention did not persist after it was discontinued.

Methodological Review: What can natural language processing do for clinical decision support?

Institutions all want electronic medical record (EMR) systems. They want them to solve their record movement problems, to improve the quality and coherence of the care process, to automate guidelines and care pathways to assist clinical research, outcomes management, and process improvement. EMRs are very difficult to construct because the existing electronic data sources, e.g., laboratory systems, pharmacy systems, and physician dictation systems, reside on many isolated islands with differing structures, differing levels of granularity, and different code systems. To accelerate EMR deployment we need to focus on the interfaces instead of the EMR system. We have the interface solutions in the form of standards: IP, HL7/ASTM, DICOM, LOINC, SNOMED, and others developed by the medical informatics community. We just have to embrace them. One remaining problem is the efficient capture of physician information in a coded form. Research is still needed to solve this last problem.

Delayed feedback of physician performance versus immediate reminders to perform preventive care effects on physician compliance

Computerized clinical decision support (CDS) aims to aid decision making of health care providers and the public by providing easily accessible health-related information at the point and time it is needed. natural language processing (NLP) is instrumental in using free-text information to drive CDS, representing clinical knowledge and CDS interventions in standardized formats, and leveraging clinical narrative. The early innovative NLP research of clinical narrative was followed by a period of stable research conducted at the major clinical centers and a shift of mainstream interest to biomedical NLP. This review primarily focuses on the recently renewed interest in development of fundamental NLP methods and advances in the NLP systems for CDS. The current solutions to challenges posed by distinct sublanguages, intended user groups, and support goals are discussed.

Controlled Trial of Direct Physician Order Entry: Effects on Physicians' Time Utilization in Ambulatory Primary Care Internal Medicine Practices

In an academic general medicine clinic, we performed a randomized, controlled trial to compare (1) the effects of supplying monthly feedback reports of compliance with preventive care protocols by 135 internal medicine house staff with (2) the effects of specific reminders given to them at the time of patient visits. The protocols were randomly divided into two groups, A and B, and half the house staff were given feedback for Group A and half for Group B. Thus, each group served as a control for the other. Each feedback group was also randomly assigned to receive reminders for either Group A or B protocols. House staff receiving feedback more often complied with fecal occult blood testing, mammography, pneumococcal vaccination, use of metronidazole, and combined Group A and B protocols than did controls (P < 0.01). There was also significantly more compliance with the same protocols by house staff receiving reminders, but the increase for fecal occult blood testing, pneumococcal vaccination, and combined Group A protocols was twice that seen in physicians given feedback alone. In addition, reminders alone increased compliance with oral calcium supplementation. Overall compliance with the preventive care protocols was low: 10-15% in physicians receiving neither feedback nor reminders, increasing to 15-30% in those receiving reminders. Physician compliance with suggested preventive care protocols can be increased by both delayed feedback and immediate reminders, but reminders have a greater effect.

Effects of computerized guidelines for managing heart disease in primary care.

OBJECTIVE Direct physician order entry (POE) offers many potential benefits, but evidence suggests that POE requires substantially more time than traditional paper-based ordering methods. The Medical Gopher is a well-accepted system for direct POE that has been in use for more than 15 years. The authors hypothesized that physicians using the Gopher would not spend any more time writing orders than physicians using paper-based methods. DESIGN A randomized controlled trial of POE using the Medical Gopher system in 11 primary care internal medicine practices. MEASUREMENTS The authors collected detailed time use data using time motion studies of the physicians and surveyed their opinions about the POE system. RESULTS The authors found that physicians using the Gopher spent 2.2 min more per patient overall, but when duplicative and administrative tasks were taken into account, physicians were found to have spent only 0.43 min more per patient. With experience, the order entry time fell by 3.73 min per patient. The survey revealed that the physicians believed that the system improved their patient care and wanted the Gopher to continue to be available in their practices. CONCLUSIONS Little extra time, if any, was required for physicians to use the POE system. With experience in its use, physicians may even save time while enjoying the many benefits of POE.