Cargando…

Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software

BACKGROUND: Electronic prescribing is now the norm in many countries. We wished to find out if clinical software systems used by general practitioners in Australia include features (functional capabilities and other characteristics) that facilitate improved patient safety and care, with a focus on q...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sweidan, Michelle, Williamson, Margaret, Reeve, James F, Harvey, Ken, O'Neill, Jennifer A, Schattner, Peter, Snowdon, Teri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115840/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-11-27
_version_ 1782206176867385344
author Sweidan, Michelle
Williamson, Margaret
Reeve, James F
Harvey, Ken
O'Neill, Jennifer A
Schattner, Peter
Snowdon, Teri
author_facet Sweidan, Michelle
Williamson, Margaret
Reeve, James F
Harvey, Ken
O'Neill, Jennifer A
Schattner, Peter
Snowdon, Teri
author_sort Sweidan, Michelle
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Electronic prescribing is now the norm in many countries. We wished to find out if clinical software systems used by general practitioners in Australia include features (functional capabilities and other characteristics) that facilitate improved patient safety and care, with a focus on quality use of medicines. METHODS: Seven clinical software systems used in general practice were evaluated. Fifty software features that were previously rated as likely to have a high impact on safety and/or quality of care in general practice were tested and are reported here. RESULTS: The range of results for the implementation of 50 features across the 7 clinical software systems was as follows: 17-31 features (34-62%) were fully implemented, 9-13 (18-26%) partially implemented, and 9-20 (18-40%) not implemented. Key findings included: Access to evidence based drug and therapeutic information was limited. Decision support for prescribing was available but varied markedly between systems. During prescribing there was potential for medicine mis-selection in some systems, and linking a medicine with its indication was optional. The definition of 'current medicines' versus 'past medicines' was not always clear. There were limited resources for patients, and some medicines lists for patients were suboptimal. Results were provided to the software vendors, who were keen to improve their systems. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical systems tested lack some of the features expected to support patient safety and quality of care. Standards and certification for clinical software would ensure that safety features are present and that there is a minimum level of clinical functionality that clinicians could expect to find in any system.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3115840
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31158402011-06-16 Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software Sweidan, Michelle Williamson, Margaret Reeve, James F Harvey, Ken O'Neill, Jennifer A Schattner, Peter Snowdon, Teri BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: Electronic prescribing is now the norm in many countries. We wished to find out if clinical software systems used by general practitioners in Australia include features (functional capabilities and other characteristics) that facilitate improved patient safety and care, with a focus on quality use of medicines. METHODS: Seven clinical software systems used in general practice were evaluated. Fifty software features that were previously rated as likely to have a high impact on safety and/or quality of care in general practice were tested and are reported here. RESULTS: The range of results for the implementation of 50 features across the 7 clinical software systems was as follows: 17-31 features (34-62%) were fully implemented, 9-13 (18-26%) partially implemented, and 9-20 (18-40%) not implemented. Key findings included: Access to evidence based drug and therapeutic information was limited. Decision support for prescribing was available but varied markedly between systems. During prescribing there was potential for medicine mis-selection in some systems, and linking a medicine with its indication was optional. The definition of 'current medicines' versus 'past medicines' was not always clear. There were limited resources for patients, and some medicines lists for patients were suboptimal. Results were provided to the software vendors, who were keen to improve their systems. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical systems tested lack some of the features expected to support patient safety and quality of care. Standards and certification for clinical software would ensure that safety features are present and that there is a minimum level of clinical functionality that clinicians could expect to find in any system. BioMed Central 2011-05-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3115840/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-11-27 Text en Copyright ©2011 Sweidan et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sweidan, Michelle
Williamson, Margaret
Reeve, James F
Harvey, Ken
O'Neill, Jennifer A
Schattner, Peter
Snowdon, Teri
Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
title Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
title_full Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
title_fullStr Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
title_short Evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
title_sort evaluation of features to support safety and quality in general practice clinical software
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115840/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-11-27
work_keys_str_mv AT sweidanmichelle evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware
AT williamsonmargaret evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware
AT reevejamesf evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware
AT harveyken evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware
AT oneilljennifera evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware
AT schattnerpeter evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware
AT snowdonteri evaluationoffeaturestosupportsafetyandqualityingeneralpracticeclinicalsoftware