Reviewing the impact of computerized provider order entry on clinical outcomes: The quality of systematic reviews

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Volumn 81, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 219-231

  Weir, Charlene R ^a,c   Staggers, Nancy ^b,c   Laukert, Tamara ^a,b,c  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF NURSING   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Computerized physician order entry system; CPOE; Electronic prescribing; Medical order entry systems; Review; Systematic

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED PHYSICIAN ORDER ENTRY SYSTEMS; CPOE; ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING; ORDER ENTRY SYSTEM; SYSTEMATIC;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; REVIEWS;

DATABASE SYSTEMS;

CINAHL; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COMPUTERIZED PROVIDER ORDER ENTRY; DOCUMENTATION; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HUMAN; MEDLINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCINFO; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC);

GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; MEDICAL ORDER ENTRY SYSTEMS; MEDICATION ERRORS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE);

EID: 84858149692     PISSN: 13865056     EISSN: 18728243     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.01.009     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Ammenworth E., Schnell-Inderst P., Siebert U. Vision and challenges of evidence-based health informatics: a case study of a CPOE meta-analysis. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2010, 79:pe83-pe88.
2. Ash J.S., Berg M., Coiera E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: the nature of patient care information system-related errors. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2004, 11(2):104-112.
3. Campbell E.M., Sittig D.F., Ash J.S., Guappone K.P., Dykstra R.H. Types of unintended consequences related to computerized provider order entry. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13(5):547-556.
4. Han Y.Y., et al. Unexpected increased mortality after implementation of a commercially sold computerized physician order entry system. Pediatrics 2005, 116(6):1506-1512.
5. Koppel R., et al. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA 2005, 293(10):1197-2003.
6. Higgins, J. and S.E. Green, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2009. Available from , 2009. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org/.
7. Liberati A., et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analysis of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009, 151. W-65-W-94.
8. Moher D., et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. The Lancet 1999, 354:1896.
9. Williamson J., et al. Healthcare Information Synthesis: Developing and Applying Clinical Knowledge to Improve Outcomes 2002, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, ISBN 0761908242.
10. Chaudhry B., et al. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann. Intern. Med. 2006, 144(10):742-752.
11. Weir C.R., Staggers N., Phansalkar S. The state of the evidence for computerized provider order entry: a systematic review and analysis of the quality of the literature. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009, 78(6):365-374.
12. Sacks H., et al. Meta-analysis: an update. Mt. Sinai J. Med. 1996, 63:216-224.
13. Wen J., et al. The reporting quality of meta-analyses improves: a random sampling study. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2008, 61:770.
14. Bero L., Rennie D. The Cochrane collaboration: preparing, maintaining, and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. JAMA 1995, 274:1935-1938.
15. Egger M., Smith G., Altman D. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context 2003, BMJ Publishing, London. 3rd edition.
16. Feldstein A.C., Glasgow R.E. A practical, robust implementation and sustainability model (PRISM) for integrating research findings into practice. Jt. Commun. J. Qual. Patient Saf. 2008, 34(4):228-243.
17. Hunter J., Schmidt F. Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings 2004, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
18. Shea B., Dubé C., Moher D. Assessing the quality of reports of meta-analyses: a systematic review of scales and checklists. Systematic Reviews 2001, 122-139. BMJ, London. M. Egger, G. Smith, D. Altman (Eds.).
19. Oxman A., Guyatt G. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1991, 44:1271-1278.
20. Oxman A. Checklists for review articles. BMJ 1994, 309:648-651.
21. Moher D., et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis: the PRISMA statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009, 151:264-269.
22. Sacks H., et al. Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. N. Engl. J. Med. 1987, 316:450-455.
23. Oxman A., Guyatt G. The science of reviewing research. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1993, 703:125-133.
24. Greenhalgh T., et al. Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. Milbank Q. 2009, 4:729-788.
25. Lehman M.L., et al. Physician order entry impact on drug turn-around times. Proceedings of AMIA Symposium 2001, 359-363.
26. Papshev D., Peterson A. Electronic prescribing in ambulatory practice: promises, pitfalls, and potential solutions. Am. J. Manag. Care 2001, 7(7):725-736.
27. Rothschild J. Computerized physician order entry in the critical care and general inpatient setting: a narrative review. J. Crit. Care 2004, 19(4):271-278.
28. Garg A.X., et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005, 293(10):1223-1238.
29. Poissant L., et al. The impact of electronic health records on time efficiency of physicians and nurses: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2005, 12(5):505-516.
30. Agrawal A. Medication errors: prevention using information technology systems. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2009, 67(6):681-686.
31. Delpierre C., et al. A systematic review of computer-based patient record systems and quality of care: more randomized clinical trials or a broader approach?. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2004, 16(5):407-416.
32. Hayrinen K., Saranto K., Nykanen P. Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: a review of the research literature. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2008, 77(5):291-304.
33. Jamal A., McKenzie K., Clark M. The impact of health information technology on the quality of medical and health care: a systematic review. HIM J. 2009, 38(3):26-37.
34. Johnson M., et al. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. Ann. Intern. Med. 1994, 120:135-142.
35. Khajouei R., Jaspers M. The impact of CPOE medication systems' design aspects on usability, workflow and medication orders: a systematic review. Methods Inf. Med. 2010, 49(1):3-19.
36. Mador R., Shaw N. The impact of a Critical Care Information System (CCIS) on time spent charting and in direct patient care by staff in the ICU: a review of the literature. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009, 79(7):435-445.
37. Mitchell E., Sullivan F. A descriptive feast but an evaluative famine: systematic review of published articles on primary care computing during 1980-1997. BMJ 2001, 322:279-282.
38. Mollon B., et al. Factors predicting the success of computerized decision support for prescribing: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Making 2009, 9(11):1-9. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/9/11.
39. Moorman P., Schuemi E.M., van der L.J. An inventory of publications on electronic medical records revisited. Methods Inf. Med. 2009, 48(May 15 (5)):454-458.
40. Saranto K., Kinnunen U. Evaluating nursing documentation - research designs methods: systematic review. J. Adv. Nurs. 2009, 65(3):464-476.
41. Schedlbauer A., et al. What evidence supports the use of computerized alerts and prompts to improve clinicians' prescribing behavior. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009, 16(4):531-538.
42. Sintchenko V., Coiera E., Gilbert G. Decision support systems for antibiotic prescribing. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2008, 21(6):583-589.
43. Sullivan F., Mitchell E. Has general practitioner computing made a difference to patient care?. BMJ 1995, 311:848-852.
44. Wu R., Straus S. Evidence for handheld electronic medical records in improving care: a systematic review. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Making 2006, 6:26.
45. Ammenworth E., et al. The effect of electronic prescribing on medication errors and adverse drug events: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2008, 15:585-600.
46. Georgiou A., et al. The impact of computerised physician order entry systems on pathology services: a systematic review. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2007, 76(7):514-529.
47. Shamliyan T., et al. Just what the doctor ordered: review of the evidence of the impact of computerized physician order entry system on medication errors. Health Serv. Res. 2008, 43(1):32-53.
48. van Rosse F., et al. The effect of computerized physician order entry on medication prescription errors and clinical outcome in pediatric and intensive care: a systematic review. Pediatrics 2009, 123:1184-1190.
49. Niazkhani Z., et al. The impact of computerized provider order entry system on inpatient clinical workflow: a literature review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009, 16(4):539-549.
50. Cooper H., Hedges L. The Handbook of Research Synthesis 1994, Russell Sage, New York. 1st edition.
51. Reckmann M., et al. Does computerized provider order entry reduce prescribing errors for hospital inpatients?. A systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2009, 16:613-623.
52. Wolfstadt J.I., Gurwitz J.H., Field T.S., Lee M., Kalkar S., Wu W., Rochon P.A. The effect of computerized physician order entry with clinical decision support on the rates of adverse drug events: a systematic review. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2008, 23(4):451-458.
53. Oren E., Shaffer E., Guglielmo B. Impact of emerging technologies on medication errors and adverse drug events. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 2003, 60(14):1447-1458.
54. Peters M., et al. Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA 2006, 295(6):676-680.
55. Shadish W.R., Cook T.D., Campbell D.T. Experimental and Quasi-Expermental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference 2002, Houghton Mifflen Company, Boston.
56. Shekelle P. Costs and Benefits of Health Information Technology 2006, Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center, Santa Monica, CA.
57. IOM, (Institute of Medicine). Key Capabilities of an Electronic Health Record System. Consensus Report, 2003. US Department of Heatlh and Human Services.
58. HIMMSS, A., HIMSS EMR Adoption Model. , 2010. (accessed 10.09.10). http://www.himssanalytics.org/hc_providers/emr_adoption.asp.
59. Berg M. Implementing information systems in health care organizations: myths and challenges. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2001, 64(2-3):143-156.
60. Berg M. The search for synergy: interrelating medical work and patient care information systems. Methods Inf. Med. 2003, 42(4):337-344.
61. Cochrane. Cochrane Handbook. [Internet Site] 2006 Available from:(accessed 02.06.07). http://cochrane.org/admin/manual.htm.
62. Talmon J., et al. STARE-HI - statement on the reporting of evaluation studies in health informatics. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2009, 78:1-9.
63. Eslami S., Abu-Hanna A., Keizer N. Evaluation of outpatient computerized physician medication order entry systems: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2007, 14:400-406.
64. Eslami S., de Keizer N., Abu-Hanna A. The impact of computerized physician medication order entry in hospitalized patients - a systematic review. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2008, 77:365-376.
65. Hider P. Electronic Prescribing: A Critical Review of the Literature 2002, Department of Public Health and General Practice, Christchurch, NZ.
66. Kaushal R., Shojania K.G., Bates D.W. Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review. Arch. Intern. Med. 2003, 163(12):1409-1416.