» Articles » PMID: 27437060

Workarounds and Test Results Follow-up in Electronic Health Record-Based Primary Care

Overview
Publisher Thieme
Date 2016 Jul 21
PMID 27437060
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Electronic health records (EHRs) have potential to facilitate reliable communication and follow-up of test results. However, limitations in EHR functionality remain, leading practitioners to use workarounds while managing test results. Workarounds can lead to patient safety concerns and signify indications as to how to build better EHR systems that meet provider needs.

Objective: To understand why primary care practitioners (PCPs) use workarounds to manage test results by analyzing data from a previously conducted national cross-sectional survey on test result management.

Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis of quantitative and qualitative data from a national survey of PCPs practicing in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and explored the use of workarounds in test results management. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to examine the association between key sociotechnical factors that could affect test results follow-up (e.g., both technology-related and those unrelated to technology, such as organizational support for patient notification) and workaround use. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of free text survey data to examine reasons for use of workarounds.

Results: Of 2554 survey respondents, 1104 (43%) reported using workarounds related to test results management. Of these 1028 (93%) described the type of workaround they were using; 719 (70%) reported paper-based methods, while 230 (22%) used a combination of paper- and computer-based workarounds. Primary care practitioners who self-reported limited administrative support to help them notify patients of test results or described an instance where they personally (or a colleague) missed results, were more likely to use workarounds (p=0.02 and p=0.001, respectively). Qualitative analysis identified three main reasons for workaround use: 1) as a memory aid, 2) for improved efficiency and 3) for facilitating internal and external care coordination.

Conclusion: Workarounds to manage EHR-based test results are common, and their use results from unmet provider information management needs. Future EHRs and the respective work systems around them need to evolve to meet these needs.

Citing Articles

Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.

Nankervis H, Huntley A, Huntley A, Whiting P, Hamilton W, Singh H Br J Gen Pract. 2024; .

PMID: 39374979 PMC: 11881010. DOI: 10.3399/BJGP.2024.0338.


Exploring the association between primary care efficiency and health system characteristics across European countries: a two-stage data envelopment analysis.

Moran V, Suhrcke M, Nolte E BMC Health Serv Res. 2023; 23(1):1348.

PMID: 38049793 PMC: 10694950. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-10369-y.


Electronic Co-design (ECO-design) Workshop for Increasing Clinician Participation in the Design of Health Services Interventions: Participatory Design Approach.

Savoy A, Patel H, Shahid U, Offner A, Singh H, Giardina T JMIR Hum Factors. 2022; 9(3):e37313.

PMID: 36136374 PMC: 9539640. DOI: 10.2196/37313.


Providers Electing to Receive Electronic Result Notifications: Demographics and Motivation.

Slovis B, Vervilles W, Vawdrey D, Swartz J, Winans C, Kairys J Appl Clin Inform. 2022; 13(3):681-691.

PMID: 35830863 PMC: 9279013. DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1751092.


Workarounds in Electronic Health Record Systems and the Revised Sociotechnical Electronic Health Record Workaround Analysis Framework: Scoping Review.

Blijleven V, Hoxha F, Jaspers M J Med Internet Res. 2022; 24(3):e33046.

PMID: 35289752 PMC: 8965666. DOI: 10.2196/33046.


References
1.
Singh H, Naik A, Rao R, Petersen L . Reducing diagnostic errors through effective communication: harnessing the power of information technology. J Gen Intern Med. 2008; 23(4):489-94. PMC: 2359508. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-007-0393-z. View

2.
Ash J, Sittig D, Poon E, Guappone K, Campbell E, Dykstra R . The extent and importance of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007; 14(4):415-23. PMC: 2244906. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2373. View

3.
Campbell E, Sittig D, Ash J, Guappone K, Dykstra R . Types of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006; 13(5):547-56. PMC: 1561794. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2042. View

4.
Halbesleben J, Savage G, Wakefield D, Wakefield B . Rework and workarounds in nurse medication administration process: implications for work processes and patient safety. Health Care Manage Rev. 2010; 35(2):124-33. DOI: 10.1097/HMR.0b013e3181d116c2. View

5.
Bates D, Boyle D, Teich J . Impact of computerized physician order entry on physician time. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care. 1994; :996. PMC: 2247898. View