Assessing the Safety of Custom Web-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems in Electronic Health Records: A Case Study.
Journal
Applied clinical informatics
ISSN: 1869-0327
Titre abrégé: Appl Clin Inform
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101537732
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2019
03 2019
Historique:
entrez:
4
4
2019
pubmed:
4
4
2019
medline:
2
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
With the widespread adoption of vendor-supplied electronic health record (EHR) systems, clinical decision support (CDS) customization efforts beyond those anticipated by the vendor may require the use of technologies external to the EHR such as web services. Pursuing such customizations, however, is not without risk. Validating the expected behavior of a customized CDS system in the high-volume, complex environment of the live EHR is a challenging problem. This article identifies technology failures that impacted clinical care related to web service-based advanced custom CDS systems embedded in the complex sociotechnical context of a production EHR. In an academic health system's primary care network, we performed an inventory of incidents between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016 related to a customized CDS system and performed a targeted review of changes in the CDS source code. Additional feedback on the root cause of individual incidents was obtained through interviews with members of the CDS project teams. We identified five CDS malfunctions that impaired clinical workflow. The mechanisms for these failures are mapped to four characteristics of well-behaved applications: (1) system integrity; (2) data integrity; (3) reliability; and (4) scalability. Over the 9-year period, two malfunctions of the customized CDS significantly impaired clinical workflow for a total of 5 hours. Lesser impacts-loss of individual features with straightforward workarounds-arose from three malfunctions, which affected users on 53 days. Advanced customization of EHRs for the purpose of CDS can present significant risks to clinical workflow. This case study highlights that advanced customization of CDS within a commercial EHR may support care for complex patient populations, but ongoing monitoring and support is required to ensure its safe use.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
With the widespread adoption of vendor-supplied electronic health record (EHR) systems, clinical decision support (CDS) customization efforts beyond those anticipated by the vendor may require the use of technologies external to the EHR such as web services. Pursuing such customizations, however, is not without risk. Validating the expected behavior of a customized CDS system in the high-volume, complex environment of the live EHR is a challenging problem.
OBJECTIVE
This article identifies technology failures that impacted clinical care related to web service-based advanced custom CDS systems embedded in the complex sociotechnical context of a production EHR.
METHODS
In an academic health system's primary care network, we performed an inventory of incidents between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016 related to a customized CDS system and performed a targeted review of changes in the CDS source code. Additional feedback on the root cause of individual incidents was obtained through interviews with members of the CDS project teams.
RESULTS
We identified five CDS malfunctions that impaired clinical workflow. The mechanisms for these failures are mapped to four characteristics of well-behaved applications: (1) system integrity; (2) data integrity; (3) reliability; and (4) scalability. Over the 9-year period, two malfunctions of the customized CDS significantly impaired clinical workflow for a total of 5 hours. Lesser impacts-loss of individual features with straightforward workarounds-arose from three malfunctions, which affected users on 53 days.
DISCUSSION
Advanced customization of EHRs for the purpose of CDS can present significant risks to clinical workflow.
CONCLUSION
This case study highlights that advanced customization of CDS within a commercial EHR may support care for complex patient populations, but ongoing monitoring and support is required to ensure its safe use.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30943572
doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1683985
pmc: PMC6447398
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
237-246Informations de copyright
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Drs. Fiks and Grundmeier are coinventors of the “Care Assistant” software that was evaluated in this study. Mr. Miller is a coinventor of “Project SHARE” which is a Care Assistant module to support the care of children with attention deficit disorder. They hold no patent on the software and have earned no money from this invention. No licensing agreement exists. Dr. Fiks has also received an Independent Research Grant from Pfizer from which he personally drew no support. The other authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007 Jul-Aug;14(4):415-23
pubmed: 17460127
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010 Jul-Aug;17(4):454-61
pubmed: 20595314
Pediatrics. 2013 Jun;131(6):1114-24
pubmed: 23650297
Acad Pediatr. 2012 Sep-Oct;12(5):445-55
pubmed: 22748759
Pediatrics. 2015 Apr;135(4):e965-73
pubmed: 25755233
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Jul-Aug;19(4):597-603
pubmed: 22427539
Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2016 Oct;55(12):1100-6
pubmed: 26507248
Int J Med Inform. 2013 Jun;82(6):492-503
pubmed: 23490305
Appl Clin Inform. 2017 Sep 06;8(3):910-923
pubmed: 28880046
Appl Clin Inform. 2015 Dec 30;6(4):769-84
pubmed: 26767069
Arch Intern Med. 2011 Jul 25;171(14):1281-4
pubmed: 21788544
J Pediatr. 2012 May;160(5):719-24
pubmed: 22364853
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994 Nov-Dec;1(6):428-38
pubmed: 7850568
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Nov;23(6):1068-1076
pubmed: 27026616
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Sep-Oct;13(5):547-56
pubmed: 16799128
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 May-Jun;15(3):272-7
pubmed: 18308981
Pediatrics. 2010 Apr;125(4):e770-7
pubmed: 20231191
World J Surg. 2008 Aug;32(8):1643-50
pubmed: 18491185
Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Apr;9(2):268-274
pubmed: 29695013
JAMA. 2005 Mar 9;293(10):1197-203
pubmed: 15755942
J Ambul Care Manage. 2014 Apr-Jun;37(2):120-6
pubmed: 24594560
Arch Intern Med. 2000 Feb 14;160(3):301-8
pubmed: 10668831
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004 Mar-Apr;11(2):104-12
pubmed: 14633936
Pediatrics. 2013 Apr;131(4):e1071-81
pubmed: 23478860
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016 Sep;23(5):899-908
pubmed: 26911829
Surgery. 2007 Nov;142(5):658-65
pubmed: 17981185
Ann Intern Med. 1994 Jan 15;120(2):135-42
pubmed: 8256973
J Biomed Inform. 2012 Dec;45(6):1202-16
pubmed: 22995208
JAMA. 2010 Feb 3;303(5):450-1
pubmed: 20124542
N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 26;360(13):1278-81
pubmed: 19321867
Hum Factors. 1995 Mar;37(1):20-31
pubmed: 7790008
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001 Nov-Dec;8(6):527-34
pubmed: 11687560
Int J Med Inform. 2001 Nov;64(1):15-37
pubmed: 11673100
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018 May 1;25(5):496-506
pubmed: 29045651
Pediatrics. 2007 Oct;120(4):707-14
pubmed: 17908756
Appl Clin Inform. 2017 Jun 07;8(2):603-611
pubmed: 28850154