The Impact of Order Source Misattribution on Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE) Performance Metrics.

BACKGROUND: One strategy to foster adoption of computerized provider order entry (CPOE) by physicians is the monthly distribution of a list identifying the number and use rate percentage of orders entered electronically versus on paper by each physician in the facility. Physicians care about CPOE use rate reports because they support the patient safety and quality improvement objectives of CPOE implementation. Certain physician groups are also motivated because they participate in contracted financial and performance arrangements that include incentive payments or financial penalties for meeting (or failing to meet) a specified CPOE use rate target. Misattribution of order sources can hinder accurate measurement of individual physician CPOE use and can thereby undermine providers' confidence in their reported performance, as well as their motivation to utilize CPOE. Misattribution of order sources also has significant patient safety, quality, and medicolegal implications. OBJECTIVE: This analysis sought to evaluate the magnitude and sources of misattribution among hospitalists with high CPOE use and, if misattribution was found, to formulate strategies to prevent and reduce its recurrence, thereby ensuring the integrity and credibility of individual and facility CPOE use rate reporting. METHODS: A detailed manual order source review and validation of all orders issued by one hospitalist group at a midsize community hospital was conducted for a one-month study period. RESULTS: We found that a small but not dismissible percentage of orders issued by hospitalists-up to 4.18 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 3.84-4.56 percent) per month-were attributed inaccurately. Sources of misattribution by department or function were as follows: nursing, 42 percent; pharmacy, 38 percent; laboratory, 15 percent; unit clerk, 3 percent; and radiology, 2 percent. Order management and protocol were the most common correct order sources that were incorrectly attributed. CONCLUSION: Order source misattribution can negatively affect reported provider CPOE use rates and should be investigated if providers perceive discrepancies between reported rates and their actual performance. Preventive education and communication efforts across departments can help prevent and reduce misattribution.

Clinical impact and value of workstation single sign-on.

BACKGROUND: CHRISTUS Health began implementation of computer workstation single sign-on (SSO) in 2015. SSO technology utilizes a badge reader placed at each workstation where clinicians swipe or "tap" their identification badges. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of SSO implementation in reducing clinician time logging in to various clinical software programs, and in financial savings from migrating to a thin client that enabled replacement of traditional hard drive computer workstations. METHODS: Following implementation of SSO, a total of 65,202 logins were sampled systematically during a 7day period among 2256 active clinical end users for time saved in 6 facilities when compared to pre-implementation. Dollar values were assigned to the time saved by 3 groups of clinical end users: physicians, nurses and ancillary service providers. RESULTS: The reduction of total clinician login time over the 7day period showed a net gain of 168.3h per week of clinician time - 28.1h (2.3 shifts) per facility per week. Annualized, 1461.2h of mixed physician and nursing time is liberated per facility per annum (121.8 shifts of 12h per year). The annual dollar cost savings of this reduction of time expended logging in is $92,146 per hospital per annum and $1,658,745 per annum in the first phase implementation of 18 hospitals. Computer hardware equipment savings due to desktop virtualization increases annual savings to $2,333,745. Qualitative value contributions to clinician satisfaction, reduction in staff turnover, facilitation of adoption of EHR applications, and other benefits of SSO are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: SSO had a positive impact on clinician efficiency and productivity in the 6 hospitals evaluated, and is an effective and cost-effective method to liberate clinician time from repetitive and time consuming logins to clinical software applications.