This is being republished from EHR Bloggers
As any left-handed person that has struggled to use a pair of scissors
or a fountain pen will verify, the design of a tool impacts the quality
of the work done with that tool. That’s true for electronic health
records, as well. EMRs support complex cognitive processes, and the way
they are designed directly impacts the speed and accuracy of a
clinician’s work.
Even small design flaws in EMR systems can
jeopardize patient safety. Suppose for example, that medication
order-entry forms in an EMR were presented in an order that differed
from the way a physician normally completes them on paper. The change
would force her to alter a long-established thought process, which
amounts to a recurring nuisance until someday, when she is hassled or
tired, she forgets to make the adjustment. It’s an accident waiting to
happen.
The National Research Council reached this conclusion in
its recent report, Computational
Technology for Effective Health Care. “The nationwide deployment of
health IT will not be sufficient to achieve the vision of 21st century
healthcare, and may even set back the cause,” the NRC claimed, unless
vendors put a “greater emphasis on providing cognitive support for
healthcare providers.”
In industries ranging from nuclear power
to aviation, technology companies work continuously to improve the
usability of their products. As McKesson’s Beth Meyer points
out, “the cockpit of a jet airliner looks fundamentally different
today than it did 10 years ago. [It] is easier to learn, more intuitive
and – as a result – safer to use. Doing the same for health IT is
critical.”
Yet, according to an AHRQ-funded
study of certified EMR vendors, formal usability testing
procedures, use of user-centered design principles and specific resource
personnel with expertise in usability engineering are not common among
EMR vendors. Not
surprisingly, in a recent
survey, EMR users described frequent and severe “points of pain”
while using these systems.
Importantly, poor usability has held
back EMR sales across the nation, according to a HIMSS
Task Force Report which concludes:
“EMR adoption rates
have been slower than expected in the United States…a key reason, aside
from initial costs and lost productivity during EMR implementation, is
lack of efficiency and usability of EMRs currently available.”
Why
would EMR vendors fail to perceptibly improve the usability of their
products when it appears to be in their economic interests to do so? Are
technical challenges too great given the 80s- and 90s-vintage IT
architecture underlying many legacy EMR products? Do they worry that
their customers will balk at the costs and operational difficulties
associated with updating disparate servers and re-training users?
Whatever
the reason, some argue that the industry-wide failure to improve EMR
usability represents a market failure that necessitates regulatory
intervention. In its recent report on EMR usability for example, the
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concluded that usability
should become part of the certification test for EMRs.
EHRBloggers
disagrees with this position. We maintain that the market can decide
the matter without need for government intervention, which can be
expensive and inefficient, and will in any case be unlikely to impact
EMR usability for at least 5 years…a critical delay given the
government’s aspirations to foster rapid dissemination of EMRs via the
HITECH incentive plan.
Two things are required for a
market-driven solution to work. The first is immediate availability of
new EMR products that are demonstrably more usable than those being used
by most providers today. We have argued
previously that new business models can be devised which drive EMR
vendors to create more usable products (and indeed, one EMR vendor has adopted such a
model).
The second is that providers need to vote with their
feet. We urge prospective EMR buyers to compare usability across EMR
products before they buy and factor these findings into their decision.
Which system allows you to order medications most quickly? Which one
allows you to create the most elegant quality reports, share your
records with other providers and look-up lab results in the most
intuitive fashion? Which vendor responds to your questions most quickly?
Which vendor has the best track record for implementing user-generated
suggestions?
A combination of newly available, user-friendly EMRs
and customers that demand such products is by far the most efficient
way to improve EMR usability and assure these products achieve
performance levels that our patients and indeed, the entire health
system needs.
Glenn Laffel, MD, PhD
Sr. VP Clinical Affairs
Practice
Fusion EMR
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete