Donna Espadas

Timely Follow-up of Abnormal Diagnostic Imaging Test Results in an Outpatient Setting Are Electronic Medical Records Achieving Their Potential?

BACKGROUND Given the fragmentation of outpatient care, timely follow-up of abnormal diagnostic imaging results remains a challenge. We hypothesized that an electronic medical record (EMR) that facilitates the transmission and availability of critical imaging results through either automated notification (alerting) or direct access to the primary report would eliminate this problem. METHODS We studied critical imaging alert notifications in the outpatient setting of a tertiary care Department of Veterans Affairs facility from November 2007 to June 2008. Tracking software determined whether the alert was acknowledged (ie, health care practitioner/provider [HCP] opened the message for viewing) within 2 weeks of transmission; acknowledged alerts were considered read. We reviewed medical records and contacted HCPs to determine timely follow-up actions (eg, ordering a follow-up test or consultation) within 4 weeks of transmission. Multivariable logistic regression models accounting for clustering effect by HCPs analyzed predictors for 2 outcomes: lack of acknowledgment and lack of timely follow-up. RESULTS Of 123 638 studies (including radiographs, computed tomographic scans, ultrasonograms, magnetic resonance images, and mammograms), 1196 images (0.97%) generated alerts; 217 (18.1%) of these were unacknowledged. Alerts had a higher risk of being unacknowledged when the ordering HCPs were trainees (odds ratio [OR], 5.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.86-10.89) and when dual-alert (>1 HCP alerted) as opposed to single-alert communication was used (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.22-3.36). Timely follow-up was lacking in 92 (7.7% of all alerts) and was similar for acknowledged and unacknowledged alerts (7.3% vs 9.7%; P = .22). Risk for lack of timely follow-up was higher with dual-alert communication (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.06-3.48) but lower when additional verbal communication was used by the radiologist (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.04-0.38). Nearly all abnormal results lacking timely follow-up at 4 weeks were eventually found to have measurable clinical impact in terms of further diagnostic testing or treatment. CONCLUSIONS Critical imaging results may not receive timely follow-up actions even when HCPs receive and read results in an advanced, integrated electronic medical record system. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to improve patient safety in this area.

Notification of Abnormal Lab Test Results in an Electronic Medical Record: Do Any Safety Concerns Remain?

BACKGROUND Follow-up of abnormal outpatient laboratory test results is a major patient safety concern. Electronic medical records can potentially address this concern through automated notification. We examined whether automated notifications of abnormal laboratory results (alerts) in an integrated electronic medical record resulted in timely follow-up actions. METHODS We studied 4 alerts: hemoglobin A1c > or =15%, positive hepatitis C antibody, prostate-specific antigen > or =15 ng/mL, and thyroid-stimulating hormone > or =15 mIU/L. An alert tracking system determined whether the alert was acknowledged (ie, provider clicked on and opened the message) within 2 weeks of transmission; acknowledged alerts were considered read. Within 30 days of result transmission, record review and provider contact determined follow-up actions (eg, patient contact, treatment). Multivariable logistic regression models analyzed predictors for lack of timely follow-up. RESULTS Between May and December 2008, 78,158 tests (hemoglobin A1c, hepatitis C antibody, thyroid-stimulating hormone, and prostate-specific antigen) were performed, of which 1163 (1.48%) were transmitted as alerts; 10.2% of these (119/1163) were unacknowledged. Timely follow-up was lacking in 79 (6.8%), and was statistically not different for acknowledged and unacknowledged alerts (6.4% vs 10.1%; P =.13). Of 1163 alerts, 202 (17.4%) arose from unnecessarily ordered (redundant) tests. Alerts for a new versus known diagnosis were more likely to lack timely follow-up (odds ratio 7.35; 95% confidence interval, 4.16-12.97), whereas alerts related to redundant tests were less likely to lack timely follow-up (odds ratio 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.84). CONCLUSIONS Safety concerns related to timely patient follow-up remain despite automated notification of non-life-threatening abnormal laboratory results in the outpatient setting.

Prescription Errors and Outcomes Related to Inconsistent Information Transmitted through Computerized Order-Entry: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND Although several types of computerized provider order entry (CPOE)-related errors may occur, errors related to inconsistent information within the same prescription (ie, mismatch between the structured template and the associated free-text field) have not been described, to our knowledge. We determined the nature and frequency of such errors and identified their potential predictive variables. METHODS In this prospective study, we enrolled pharmacists to report prescriptions containing inconsistent communication over a 4-month period at a tertiary care facility. We also electronically retrieved all prescriptions written during the study period containing any comments in the free-text field and then randomly selected 500 for manual review to determine inconsistencies between free-text and structured fields. Of these, prescriptions without inconsistencies were categorized as controls. Data on potentially predictive variables from reported and unreported errors and controls were collected. For all inconsistencies, we determined their nature (eg, drug dosage or administration schedule) and potential harm and used multivariate logistic regression models to identify factors associated with errors and harm. RESULTS Of 55 992 new prescriptions, 532 (0.95%) were reported to contain inconsistent communication, a rate comparable to that obtained from the unreported group. Drug dosage was the most common inconsistent element among both groups. Certain medications were more likely associated with errors, as was the inpatient setting (odds ratio, 3.30; 95% confidence interval, 2.18-5.00) and surgical subspecialty (odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.57-3.82). About 20% of errors could have resulted in moderate to severe harm, for which significant independent predictors were found. CONCLUSIONS Despite standardization of data entry, inconsistent communication in CPOE poses a significant risk to safety. Improving the usability of the CPOE interface and integrating it with workflow may reduce this risk.

Improving follow-up of abnormal cancer screens using electronic health records: trust but verify test result communication

BackgroundEarly detection of colorectal cancer through timely follow-up of positive Fecal Occult Blood Tests (FOBTs) remains a challenge. In our previous work, we found 40% of positive FOBT results eligible for colonoscopy had no documented response by a treating clinician at two weeks despite procedures for electronic result notification. We determined if technical and/or workflow-related aspects of automated communication in the electronic health record could lead to the lack of response.MethodsUsing both qualitative and quantitative methods, we evaluated positive FOBT communication in the electronic health record of a large, urban facility between May 2008 and March 2009. We identified the source of test result communication breakdown, and developed an intervention to fix the problem. Explicit medical record reviews measured timely follow-up (defined as response within 30 days of positive FOBT) pre- and post-intervention.ResultsData from 11 interviews and tracking information from 490 FOBT alerts revealed that the software intended to alert primary care practitioners (PCPs) of positive FOBT results was not configured correctly and over a third of positive FOBTs were not transmitted to PCPs. Upon correction of the technical problem, lack of timely follow-up decreased immediately from 29.9% to 5.4% (p < 0.01) and was sustained at month 4 following the intervention.ConclusionElectronic communication of positive FOBT results should be monitored to avoid limiting colorectal cancer screening benefits. Robust quality assurance and oversight systems are needed to achieve this. Our methods may be useful for others seeking to improve follow-up of FOBTs in their systems.

Primary care practitioners' views on test result management in EHR-enabled health systems: a national survey

Context Failure to notify patients of test results is common even when electronic health records (EHRs) are used to report results to practitioners. We sought to understand the broad range of social and technical factors that affect test result management in an integrated EHR-based health system. Methods Between June and November 2010, we conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of all primary care practitioners (PCPs) within the Department of Veterans Affairs nationwide. Survey development was guided by a socio-technical model describing multiple inter-related dimensions of EHR use. Findings Of 5001 PCPs invited, 2590 (51.8%) responded. 55.5% believed that the EHRs did not have convenient features for notifying patients of test results. Over a third (37.9%) reported having staff support needed for notifying patients of test results. Many relied on the patients next visit to notify them for normal (46.1%) and abnormal results (20.1%). Only 45.7% reported receiving adequate training on using the EHR notification system and 35.1% reported having an assigned contact for technical assistance with the EHR; most received help from colleagues (60.4%). A majority (85.6%) stayed after hours or came in on weekends to address notifications; less than a third reported receiving protected time (30.1%). PCPs strongly endorsed several new features to improve test result management, including better tracking and visualization of result notifications. Conclusions Despite an advanced EHR, both social and technical challenges exist in ensuring notification of test results to practitioners and patients. Current EHR technology requires significant improvement in order to avoid similar challenges elsewhere.

Lessons Learned about Implementing Research Evidence into Clinical Practice

The mission of the Veterans Health Administration’s (VHA) quality enhancement research initiative (QUERI) is to enhance the quality of VHA health care by implementing clinical research findings into routine care. This paper presents lessons that QUERI investigators have learned through their initial attempts to pursue the QUERI mission. The lessons in this paper represent those that were common across multiple QUERI projects and were mutually agreed on as having substantial impact on the success of implementation. While the lessons are consistent with commonly recognized ingredients of successful implementation efforts, the examples highlight the fact that, even with a through knowledge of the literature and thoughtful planning, unexpected circumstances arise during implementation efforts that require flexibility and adaptability. The findings stress the importance of utilizing formative evaluation techniques to identify barriers to successful implementation and strategies to address these barriers.

Improving outpatient safety through effective electronic communication: a study protocol

BackgroundHealth information technology and electronic medical records (EMRs) are potentially powerful systems-based interventions to facilitate diagnosis and treatment because they ensure the delivery of key new findings and other health related information to the practitioner. However, effective communication involves more than just information transfer; despite a state of the art EMR system, communication breakdowns can still occur. [1–3] In this project, we will adapt a model developed by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) to understand and improve the relationship between work systems and processes of care involved with electronic communication in EMRs. We plan to study three communication activities in the Veterans Health Administrations (VA) EMR: electronic communication of abnormal imaging and laboratory test results via automated notifications (i.e., alerts); electronic referral requests; and provider-to-pharmacy communication via computerized provider order entry (CPOE).AimOur specific aim is to propose a protocol to evaluate the systems and processes affecting outcomes of electronic communication in the computerized patient record system (related to diagnostic test results, electronic referral requests, and CPOE prescriptions) using a human factors engineering approach, and hence guide the development of interventions for work system redesign.DesignThis research will consist of multiple qualitative methods of task analysis to identify potential sources of error related to diagnostic test result alerts, electronic referral requests, and CPOE; this will be followed by a series of focus groups to identify barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improving the electronic communication system. Transcripts from all task analyses and focus groups will be analyzed using methods adapted from grounded theory and content analysis.

Ten Strategies to Improve Management of Abnormal Test Result Alerts in the Electronic Health Record

Missed abnormal test results are a significant patient safety problem, especially in the outpatient setting. Failure to communicate and follow up on abnormal diagnostic test results can lead to diagnostic errors, adverse events, and liability claims.1–4 Automated alert notification systems integrated within electronic health records (EHRs) offer a potential solution.5, 6 For instance, communication of abnormal clinical information through “alerts” (computerized notifications of significantly abnormal or critical test results) can potentially facilitate rapid review of patient information.7 The Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), an integrated EHR used at all Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities, uses an automated notification system (the View Alert system) to communicate abnormal diagnostic test results (Figure 1). Despite this automated notification system, we recently found that 7% of abnormal outpatient laboratory results and 8% of abnormal imaging results lacked follow-up within 30 days.8, 9 Therefore, electronic alerts do not eliminate the problem of missed results. We also found that clinicians did not acknowledge 18% of diagnostic imaging alerts and 10% of diagnostic lab alerts. Some clinicians received an overwhelming number of alerts (e.g., > 50 per day), some of which they never reviewed. Many clinicians had inconsistent knowledge of specific features in the EHR to help manage alerts. Figure 1 The View Alert Notification window of the VA’s electronic health record Improving critical test result reporting is a national patient safety goal of the Joint Commission.10 Additionally, the VA recently released a directive emphasizing timeliness of test result communication to practitioners and patients and further recommended that each VA facility address ordering and reporting test results.11 Based on our ongoing quantitative and qualitative evaluation work, we have identified ten strategies that clinicians can use immediately to improve their management of automated notifications related to abnormal test results. We identified these strategies on the basis of two chart review studies,9, 12 a focus group study,13 and in-depth task analysis sessions14 that we conducted over the course of a 2-year project funded by the VA National Center for Patient Safety. Subsequently, we obtained informal feedback from numerous primary care physicians who agreed that adoption of these strategies could help them manage alerts more reliably and effectively. Consistent with our recently proposed model for safe EHR use,15 the strategies are divided into three groups: clinician (user) centered, human-computer interface centered and communication and workflow centered.

How context affects electronic health record-based test result follow-up: a mixed-methods evaluation

Objectives Electronic health record (EHR)-based alerts can facilitate transmission of test results to healthcare providers, helping ensure timely and appropriate follow-up. However, failure to follow-up on abnormal test results (missed test results) persists in EHR-enabled healthcare settings. We aimed to identify contextual factors associated with facility-level variation in missed test results within the Veterans Affairs (VA) health system. Design, setting and participants Based on a previous survey, we categorised VA facilities according to primary care providers’ (PCPs’) perceptions of low (n=20) versus high (n=20) risk of missed test results. We interviewed facility representatives to collect data on several contextual factors derived from a sociotechnical conceptual model of safe and effective EHR use. We compared these factors between facilities categorised as low and high perceived risk, adjusting for structural characteristics. Results Facilities with low perceived risk were significantly more likely to use specific strategies to prevent alerts from being lost to follow-up (p=0.0114). Qualitative analysis identified three high-risk scenarios for missed test results: alerts on tests ordered by trainees, alerts ‘handed off’ to another covering clinician (surrogate clinician), and alerts on patients not assigned in the EHR to a PCP. Test result management policies and procedures to address these high-risk situations varied considerably across facilities. Conclusions Our study identified several scenarios that pose a higher risk for missed test results in EHR-based healthcare systems. In addition to implementing provider-level strategies to prevent missed test results, healthcare organisations should consider implementing monitoring systems to track missed test results.

Effectiveness of an electronic health record-based intervention to improve follow-up of abnormal pathology results: a retrospective record analysis.

Background and Objective:On March 11, 2009, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) implemented an electronic health record (EHR)-based intervention that required all pathology results to be transmitted to ordering providers by mandatory automated notifications. We examined the impact of this intervention on improving follow-up of abnormal outpatient pathology results. Research Design and Subjects:We extracted pathology reports from the EHR of 2 VA sites. From 16,738 preintervention and 17,305 postintervention reports between 09/01/2008 and 09/30/2009, we randomly selected about 5% and evaluated follow-up outcomes using a standardized chart review instrument. Documented responses to the alerted report (eg, ordering follow-up tests or referrals, notifying patients, and prescribing/changing treatment) were recorded. Measures:Primary outcome measures included proportion of timely follow-up responses (within 30 d) and median time to direct response for abnormal reports. Results:Of 816 preintervention and 798 postintervention reports reviewed, 666 (81.6%) and 688 (86.2%) were abnormal. Overall, there was no apparent intervention effect on timely follow-up (69% vs. 67.1%; P=0.4) or median time to direct response (8 vs. 8 d; P=0.7). However, logistic regression uncovered a significant intervention effect (preintervention odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.5–1.0) after accounting for site-specific differences in follow-up, with a lower likelihood of timely follow-up at one site (odds ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.2–0.7). Conclusions:An electronic intervention to improve test result follow-up at 2 VA institutions using the same EHR was found effective only after accounting for certain local contextual factors. Aggregating the effect of EHR interventions across different institutions and EHRs without controlling for contextual factors might underestimate their potential benefits.