The truth about doctors' handwriting: A prospective study

British Medical Journal

Volumn 313, Issue 7072, 1996, Pages 1657-1658

  Berwick, Donald M ^a   Winickoff, David E ^b  

^a INSTITUTE FOR HEALTHCARE IMPROVEMENT   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HANDWRITING; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL CARE; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY; RATING SCALE; SAFETY; SEX DIFFERENCE;

EID: 0030475705     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.313.7072.1657     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. White KB, Beary JF. Illegible handwritten medical records. New Engl J Med 1986; 314:390-1.
2. A study of physicians' handwriting as a time-waster. JAMA 1979;242:2429-30.
3. Halper NA, Colucci RD, Alicea M, Greenstein R. Intensive care order writing practices in the USA: results in a nationwide study. Crit Care Med 1991;19:433-5.
4. Brahams D. Uninsured pharmacists and illegible prescriptions. Lancet 1989;i:510.
5. Sanders S, Shaw AB. Drug name confusion. Lancet 1991;1: 56-7.
6. Mullan K. Importance of legible prescriptions. J Royal Coll Gen Pract 1989;39:347-8.
7. Fenelly WA. Can you read your own handwriting? N York J Dentistry 1975;45:73-4.
8. Institute of Medicine. The computer-based medical record: an essential technology for health care. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1991.