Minimizing electronic health record patient-note mismatches
- PMID: 21486875
- PMCID: PMC3128397
- DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2010-000068
Minimizing electronic health record patient-note mismatches
Abstract
We measured the prevalence (or rate) of patient-note mismatches (clinical notes judged to pertain to another patient) in the electronic medical record. The rate ranged from 0.5% (95% CI 0.2% to 1.7%) before a pop-up window intervention to 0.3% (95% CI 0.1% to 1.1%) after the intervention. Clinicians discovered patient-note mismatches in 0.05-0.03% of notes, or about 10% of actual mismatches. The reduction in rates after the intervention was statistically significant. Therefore, while the patient-note mismatch rate is low compared to published rates of other documentation errors, it can be further reduced by the design of the user interface.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
Similar articles
-
How accurate is the medical record? A comparison of the physician's note with a concealed audio recording in unannounced standardized patient encounters.J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 May 1;27(5):770-775. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa027. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020. PMID: 32330258 Free PMC article.
-
Prevalence and Sources of Duplicate Information in the Electronic Medical Record.JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Sep 1;5(9):e2233348. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.33348. JAMA Netw Open. 2022. PMID: 36156143 Free PMC article.
-
Essential questions: accuracy, errors and user perceptions in a drag/drop user-composable electronic health record.Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;194:181-7. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013. PMID: 23941953
-
Usability and Safety in Electronic Medical Records Interface Design: A Review of Recent Literature and Guideline Formulation.Hum Factors. 2015 Aug;57(5):805-34. doi: 10.1177/0018720815576827. Epub 2015 Mar 23. Hum Factors. 2015. PMID: 25850118 Review.
-
State of the Science of Dimensions of Nurses' User Experience When Using an Electronic Health Record.Comput Inform Nurs. 2020 Jul 28;39(2):69-77. doi: 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000644. Comput Inform Nurs. 2020. PMID: 32732645 Review.
Cited by
-
Deep Learning Algorithms for Estimation of Demographic and Anthropometric Features from Electrocardiograms.J Clin Med. 2023 Apr 12;12(8):2828. doi: 10.3390/jcm12082828. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37109165 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of real-world referential and probabilistic patient matching to advance patient identification strategy.J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022 Jul 12;29(8):1409-1415. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocac068. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022. PMID: 35568993 Free PMC article.
-
A Practical Approach for Monitoring the Use of Copy-Paste in Clinical Notes.AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2022 Feb 21;2021:1178-1185. eCollection 2021. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2022. PMID: 35308931 Free PMC article.
-
Association between limiting the number of open records in a tele-critical care setting and retract-reorder errors.J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Jul 30;28(8):1791-1795. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocab072. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021. PMID: 34100942 Free PMC article.
-
Limiting the number of open charts does not impact wrong patient order entry in the emergency department.J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2020 Jun 18;1(5):1071-1077. doi: 10.1002/emp2.12129. eCollection 2020 Oct. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2020. PMID: 33145560 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Blumenthal D. Launching HITECH. N Engl J Med 2010;362:382–5 - PubMed
-
- Koppel R, Metlay JP, Cohen A, et al. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA 2005;293:1197–203 - PubMed
-
- Wachter RM. Expected and unanticipated consequences of the quality and information technology revolutions. JAMA 2006;295:2780–3 - PubMed
-
- Egerman P, Probst M. HIT Policy Committee: Certification Adoption Workgroup Review of February 25th HIT Safety Hearing. 2010. http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_11673_911100_0... (accessed 11 Oct 2010).
