How Safe Are Electronic Health
Records?
The answer to question posed in title is: No one knows because it may be
unknowable because of complexity of
medicine, EHR use in severely ill
patients with multiple conditions, and multiple
drugs administered by a myriad of clinicians in a myriad of different diseases
and circumstances.
But Mark L. Graber, MD, and 3 coauthors
make a stab at coming up with an answer by examining malpractice claims involving
EHRs ( Mark Graber, MD, et al, ”Electronic
Health Record – Related Events in Malpractice Claims, “ Journal of Public Safety, 2015). Also see Ross Koppel, “What Do We Know about Electronic Medical
Records? The Healthcare Blog, January
10, 2015).
Why do EHRs generate so many errors – some of which result in patient
harm and fatalities? The problem,
according to Koppel, is “clunky and
user-hostile interfaces and the lack of interoperability,” rather than “user error.”
In any case, here is a list of EHR
errors culled from malpractice claims.
These errors undoubtedly represent
only 1% to 2% of EHR errors.
Most errors never eventuate in malpractice claims. Most patients and physicians are unaware an
error has occurred
Graber’s Case Examples of Health
IT Related Errors, by Category Type
1.
Fentanyl order altered
by a decimal point; patient died.
2.
Insulin order defaulted
to wrong preparation (long vs shortacting).
3.
Fentanyl overdose resulting from failed auto-deletion of earlier orders of a
lower dose.
4. The EHR automatically “signed” a
test result when in fact it had not been read; Patient did not receive results
of co-existing liver cancer and was treated for lung cancer only. Routing of
electronic data
5.
Order for blood
delayed reaching lab; patient expired before blood arrived
6.
Critical blood gas
value misrouted to the wrong unit; patient expired from respiratory failure.
7.
8. Critical ultrasound result routed to the wrong
tab in the EHR; MD never saw the result until a year later; patient experienced
delayed recognition of cancer.
8. Abnormal cardiac ultrasound results misrouted, would have prompted anticoagulation; patient died of stroke.System dysfunction or malfunction
9. Multiple
reports of system being “down,” staff unable to access information; In one case,
medication reconciliation could
not be completed, resulting in an injurious medication error.
not be completed, resulting in an injurious medication error.
10. Computer crash caused loss of colonoscopy
results; follow up delayed and next study disclosed colon cancer.
11. Nursing staff unable to locate a previous
nursing assessment and vital signs; RN asserted that the EHR had just ‘gone
live’ and
kept ‘crashing’; delayed recognition of patient’s deterioration.
kept ‘crashing’; delayed recognition of patient’s deterioration.
12. MD not able to access nursing ED triage note,
which would have changed management; patient died of subarachnoid hemorrhage.
Integr
Integr
13. Fetal demise followed by consent for “limited”
chromosome testing. Pathology unable to access the specific order, so didfull
chromosome studies not consented by the family
14. Delayed diagnosis of lung cancer; Primary care
provider could not access radiology studies at the time of patient visit; paper
results filed without the MD seeing these, staff believing the
results were available on line.
results filed without the MD seeing these, staff believing the
results were available on line.
15. OB patient requested tubal ligation at the
time of her 4th planned Caesarian section. Noted on office record but not
integrated
with the delivery room system. Covering MD delivered
the baby but did not know\see the request for tubal
ligation; Patient became pregnant 6 months later.
Lack of or failure of Alert/Alarm/Decision Support
with the delivery room system. Covering MD delivered
the baby but did not know\see the request for tubal
ligation; Patient became pregnant 6 months later.
Lack of or failure of Alert/Alarm/Decision Support
16. Pathology report of adenocarcinoma delayed in
reaching patient’s chart until after inpatient discharge and no alert sent
to patient’s physician; delayed diagnosis of cancer.
Fragmented information
to patient’s physician; delayed diagnosis of cancer.
Fragmented information
17. Test results in multiple locations; failure to
note overall decline of vital signs and lab tests; patient died of sepsis.
18. Positive test result for cervical cancer
entered into problemlist; MD expected it to be in EHR test result section;
error not discovered
until patient’s visit a year later.
until patient’s visit a year later.
19. RN entered Haldol order as 5.0 mg instead of
0.5 mg; MD meant to sign off on lab results, but signed off on the wrong
order by mistake.
All other
order by mistake.
All other
20. Pt complained of “sudden onset of chest pains
with burning epigastric pain, some relief with antacid”; Complaint field
was too small; entry noted only as “epigastric pain”; no
ECG done; patient experienced a cardiac event days later.
was too small; entry noted only as “epigastric pain”; no
ECG done; patient experienced a cardiac event days later.
21. Lack of follow up of abnormal PSA; visit notes
were sparse due to limited text fields and use of a system that referenced
problems by a number, not text.
problems by a number, not text.
22. User-Related IssuesUser errors – miscellaneous
23. Electronically
signed discharge order omitted patient’s Coumadin; patient admitted with
stroke.
24. Verbal
order for morphine entered without upper limit defined; patient become obtunded
and expired.
25. Results of positive test for C difficile not
noticed; 7 day delay in starting treatment.
26. MD unable to find pathology report in the EHR;
called Pathology to get a verbal report, which was a normal result from the
wrong patient; real patient died of cancer 3 years later, original
report was abnormal.
wrong patient; real patient died of cancer 3 years later, original
report was abnormal.
27.Hybrid health records/Conversion issue
28. Medication reconciliation list did
not include Sotalol; resident copied the ED medication list; patient went into Afib.
The EHR did not list medications from the prior admission
and did not interface with the inpatient unit.
and did not interface with the inpatient unit.
29 Patient underwent colonoscopy for
bleeding per rectum but exam was incomplete. MD changed EHR’s which didn’t
convey
the incomplete exam; patient had delayed diagnosis of colon
cancer.
the incomplete exam; patient had delayed diagnosis of colon
cancer.
30. Pediatric patient
received ampicillin in the ER despite known allergy, which had been documented
in the paper record but
not uploaded into the EHR.
Incorrect information
not uploaded into the EHR.
Incorrect information
31. Facility with new EHR dosage of Benemid copied over from paper record incorrectly; patient received double doses, developed
seizures and died.
32. Patient previously
on anticoagulation admitted for GI bleeding; MD intended to discontinue the
anticoagulant but mistakenly
clicked on “continue Lovenox for home use”.\\
clicked on “continue Lovenox for home use”.\\
33. Ultrasound results never scanned into the EHR; delayed diagnosis of thyroid malignancy.
34. MD intended to
order Flonase accidentally selected Flomax from a drop down menu.
Prepopulating; copy and paste
Prepopulating; copy and paste
35. History copied
from a previous note which did not document patient’s amiodarone medication;
delayed recognition of amiodarone
toxicity.
toxicity.
36. Patient was to
receive 6 injections of a medication; The EHR reflected 66 injections based on
use of wrong template.
37. Incorrect
conclusion that patient was on indomethacin when it was automatically pulled
forward from an outdated medication
list.
list.
38. Covering obstetrician did not have EHR access and could not access clinic notes documenting abnormal fetal size; stated he\she never received training or password.
39. failed to appreciate abnormal test results; CT
results were placed in the new EHR but MD assumed he’d receive a
paper copy.
paper copy.
40. Amoxicillin ordered for patient allergic to penicillin had allergic reaction; MD over-rode the alert.
41. Oxycodone allergy
overrode by MD which removed it from allergy list.
42. Alerts on abnormal
blood culture ignored;
·
the safety of the electronics is done for the flow of the patterns for the individuals. The judgment and motive of the site is fixed for the citizens. The ultimately followed item is done for the options for the humans it he midst of the facilities.
ReplyDeletethe safety of the electrons is done for the entertainment o the people. It has been marked for the sue of the exploe more for all items. The range is done for the improvement of the goals for the humans in the field of the actual terms.
ReplyDeletethe safety and security of the electronics is counted for the good luck for the people. It has been marked for the movement of the right and visit the site for the acquisition of the knowledge. It has been marked for the flow of the offs for the management of the scores for the humans.
ReplyDeleteHere we can without much of a stretch saw crafted by the creator. Writer is appearing full navigate here exertion to author an offer this sort of information for the general population. He might be imagine this was beneficial for us on the grounds that here I simply discover some helping material for us which was beneficial for us and we take assistance from it.
ReplyDeleteMedium of the language is deposed for the flow of the offers. The ideas of the struggle and explore more is aspired for the pipe. The ramification is instilled for the flow of the charges for the citizens in this ambit.
ReplyDeleteشركة تنظيف بخميس مشيط
ReplyDeleteشركة تنظيف منازل بخميس مشيط
تنظيف سجاد بخميس مشيط
شركة تنظيف مجالس بخميس مشيط
شركة تنظيف سجاد بابها
شركة رش مبيدات بابها
شركة تنظيف فلل بابها
شركة تنظيف سجاد بابها
شركة تنظيف كنب بابها
شركة تنظيف سجاد ومجالس بابها
شركة تنظيف خزانات بابها
شركة تنظيف منازل بابها