Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Joan Ash

Publications and source records attributed to Joan Ash.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Extending the understanding of computerized physician order entry: implications for professional collaboration, workflow and quality of care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the perceived effect of computerized physician order entry (CPOE) on professional collaboration, workflow and quality of care. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews with experts involved in the design, implementation and evaluation of computerized physician order systems in the United States. MEASUREMENTS: The interview transcripts were analyzed using six key concepts that identify context, professional collaboration, workflow and quality of care. RESULTS: The interviews reveal the complexity of CPOE. Although providers enter the orders, others collaborate in the decision-making process. There is a profound impact on workflow beyond that of the provider. While quality of care is the main impetus for implementation, it remains terribly difficult to measure the impact on quality. CONCLUSIONS: A proper understanding of CPOE as a collaborative effort and the transformation of the health care activities into integrated care programs requires an understanding of how orders are created and processed, how CPOE as part of an integrated system can support the workflow, and how risks affecting patient care can be identified and reduced, especially during hand-offs in the workflow.

Cooperative Behavior↗

An evaluation of five bedside information products using a user-centered, task-oriented approach.

PURPOSE: The paper compares several bedside information tools using user-centered, task-oriented measures to assist those making or supporting purchasing decisions. METHODS: Eighteen potential users were asked to attempt to answer clinical questions using five commercial products (ACP's PIER, DISEASEDEX, FIRSTConsult, InfoRetriever, and UpToDate). Users evaluated each tool for ease-of-use and user satisfaction. The average number of questions answered and user satisfaction were measured for each product. RESULTS: Results show no significant differences in user perceptions of content quality. However, user interaction measures (such as screen layout) show a significant preference for the UpToDate product. In addition, users found answers to significantly more questions using UpToDate. CONCLUSION: When evaluating electronic products designed for use at the point of care, the user interaction aspects of a product become as important as more traditional content-based measures of quality. Actual or potential users of such products are appropriately equipped to identify which products rate the highest on these measures.

Adult↗

Comparing bedside information tools: a user-centered, task-oriented approach.

There are a number of electronic products designed to provide information at the point of care. These bedside information tools can facilitate the practice of Evidence Based Medicine. This paper evaluates five of these products using user-centered and task-oriented methods. Twenty-four users of these products were asked to attempt to answer clinical questions using a variety of products. The proportion of questions answered, time spent searching and user satisfaction were measured for each product. Results show that proportion of questions answered and time spent searching was not necessarily correlated with user satisfaction with a product. When evaluating electronic products designed for use at the point of care, the user interaction aspects of a product become as important as more traditional content-based measures of quality. Actual or potential users of such products are in the pest position to identify which products rate the best in these measures.

Attitude to Computers↗