Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Does the EMR improve or worsen patient safety?

Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD
Physician
June 2, 2020
416 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

An excerpt from When We Do Harm: A Doctor Confronts Medical Error.

One of the selling points for the electronic medical record (EMR) was that it would be a boon for patient safety. Just having all the medical records in one place is a monumental improvement over the days of lost charts and misplaced X-rays. Avoiding errors from inscrutable handwriting has no doubt saved lives.

But EMRs can also worsen medical care and introduce errors. Cumbersome usability forces staff to take shortcuts that can be dangerous. Diagnosis codes that are driven by billing requirements distort the diagnostic process and can lead to diagnostic error. Copy-and- paste ability leads to voluminous notes that resemble those online “terms of service” agreements that you surely read assiduously.

By far, the biggest landmine for medical error and patient harm is the automated alert system. For doctors and nurses, these computerized alerts constitute one continuous, communal migraine. The EMR alert system has become an octopus of misery, swatting unceasingly from all directions. Just when you think you may have cleared the gauntlet of alerts, another seven bulbous legs come whipping at you with more alerts to navigate.

It makes me crazy—and livid—because buried within the morass of useless alerts are some important ones that I can’t afford to miss. Besides, the EMR is a legal document. Clicking “OK” to an alert indicates that I’ve read it, evaluated its contents, considered its impact, and then made a decision. That’s certainly what a lawyer would say in court.

I decided, one day, to commit myself to reading every single alert before I dismissed it. I set to work that morning, feeling like a boxer newly motivated in the ring, bobbing confidently, flexing my newly invigorated patient-safety muscles. I could almost feel the satiny robe glittering around my shoulders instead of my saggy white coat with ink stains from a leaky pen. I was ready for battle!

Let’s just say I didn’t even make it through the first round. I was defeated with my very first patient of the day. He needed thirteen prescriptions, and these generated dozens of alerts. Nearly all were useless. My patient committed the cardinal sin of being over sixty-five, so every single one of the thirteen prescriptions was accompanied by an individual warning that I needed to “prescribe with caution.” There was “weight-based dosing not available” for a medication that doesn’t need to be adjusted for weight. Then there were the alerts that seemed possibly important but were couched in murkiness: “Drug X may increase bio-availability of drug Y. Quality of data uncertain.” What the heck was I supposed to do with that?

It’s clear that the first priority of the system is attending to liability rather than to patient care. If they’ve posted every possible warning, no matter how lame, then they—the hospital, the EMR, the greater universe—cannot be held at fault if something goes wrong. It’s that pathetic doctor who clicked “OK” to the warnings who is at fault.

The whole alert system feels like a transfer of blame—not to mention workload—onto the medical staff. Doctors and nurses have no other option but to plug through the sea of alerts because we have to get the medications to our patients. It’s estimated that primary care doctors spend a full hour per day just responding to alerts. Are patients actually better off? I’m not so sure.

One day, I was plowing through my endless in-basket of test results. I came upon the A1C (average glucose) of my patient, Mr. Portero (identifying information changed). It was still astronomically high, despite his elephantine doses of insulin. His decades of diabetes had already cost him one leg and most of his vision. His kidneys had taken a hit, and I worried that dialysis could be lurking on the horizon.

Before I called him about these lab results, though, I needed to review his chart to remind myself about our last insulin adjustments. Because of his obdurate diabetes and its cascading complications, Mr. Portero was a prodigious user of the medical system. His electronic chart reflected that and took longer to load. Spending even thirty seconds staring at a whirling graphic while there is so much more work to do sends me into a tizzy, so while Mr. Portero’s chart was loading, I moved on to the labs of the next patient.

Mr. Jalloh* had been diagnosed with diabetes only a year ago, and he was in the throes of completely retooling his life. He’d dumped the white rice, which had been his daily manna. The goat stew was gone. The syrupy baklava was history. Fanta orange soda had been excised. He now whipped up “green juice” daily and was a legume poster child. When he was diagnosed the year before, he’d required two medications to control his diabetes. But now we’d been able to discontinue one of them and were in the process of weaning him off the second.

Mr. Jalloh’s youthful medical chart loaded much more quickly than Mr. Portero’s, so I decided to call him first. “Great news!” I said. “Your sugar is staying down nicely. I think we’ll be able to stop your medications completely.” With a disease like diabetes, we don’t often have unadulterated good news to relay to our patients, so this type of phone call is as rare as it is thrilling.

Mr. Jalloh was clearly elated too. “That’s fantastic,” he practically sang into the phone. “This is the first time I’ve ever gotten good news about my sugar!”

First time?

“You really made my day, Dr. Ofri! I can’t wait to dump all my syringes into the trash. Goodbye, insulin!”

Syringes? Insulin? Uh-oh.

I realized I had accidentally dialed insulin-dependent, amputated, obese, wheelchair-requiring, nearly blind Mr. Portero, not lentil-toting, kale-convert, rail-thin Mr. Jalloh. (Only in the sterile digitized world of the EMR could two patients so vastly different be confused for each other.)

It was one of my lowest moments as a doctor. First, I had to tell Mr. Portero that I’d made a mistake, mixing him up with someone else. And then I had to tell him that the good news was a false alarm. His sugar wasn’t low at all; it was depressingly high, and we’d need to increase his insulin.

I’d fallen into the trap of having two charts open at the same time. It’s easy to say that I was just being stupid. It’s a complete no-no to have two charts open at the same time—I know that! I warn my interns and students about this till I’m blue in the face.

And yet here I was doing it, and making a dangerous error because of it. I could easily have accidentally prescribed Mr. Jalloh’s pills to Mr. Portero and sent them electronically to his pharmacy. Mr. Portero could easily have taken them (he was on so many pills that changed so often that he might not have noticed one extra diabetes medication). Mr. Portero’s kidneys were in no shape to handle Mr. Jalloh’s medication. That one nephrotoxic insult could have been enough to push Mr. Portero’s fragile kidneys into dialysis territory.

I recognize that the user (me) was the primary driver of this error, but the EMR also played a role. The EMR is both cumbersome and also ridiculously easy to use. In the paper-chart world, it would be impossible to mix up a door-stop chart like Mr. Portero’s with a pamphlet-sized chart like Mr. Jalloh’s. In the EMR, it only takes a click.

The electronic medical record has been hailed as a game-changer for patient safety. It certainly has potential, particularly in the realm of population health. But for individual patients, the verdict is mixed.

Much of this comes down to basic usability. Even if an EMR is perfectly designed to avoid error, it won’t succeed if it’s so clunky to use that medical professionals end up improvising shortcuts just to survive the day. Even if the system appropriately alerts doctors to every possible drug interaction, it won’t succeed if the doctors feel drowned by the blizzard of alerts and blindly OK them all just to get a prescription done.

The EMR could stand to acquire some clinical common sense that would adapt its alert system in a more logical way. For example, if a patient who’s older than sixty-five has been taking lisinopril for twelve years, there’s no utility in sending a “prescribe with caution” alert every single time because the patient has clearly tolerated the medication for longer than half the staff has been in practice.

I can’t put all the blame on the manufacturers—although it would feel intensely satisfying for ten solidly self-righteous minutes—because they didn’t create the litigious environment that we all inhabit. Manufacturers very reasonably want to do everything to avoid lawsuits, even if it ends up depositing more work and additional misery on doctors and nurses.

Medical evangelists seem confident that artificial intelligence (AI) will swoop in like the cavalry to save the day. Perhaps AI will help EMRs to think a bit more like humans, prioritizing incoming signals with knowledge of individual patients. But it needs to be rigorously tested before being launched on the masses. Otherwise, it may end up like the EMR—introducing new forms of error just as it solves others.

To me, the biggest damage comes from the fact that the EMR has centered itself as the most important thing in the exam room, not the patient. It’s hard to have a real conversation with one person’s eyes bolted to a screen. I don’t lament this damage to communication just because I think that the schmooze aspect of medicine is the most fun. I lament it because communication with patients is one of the most powerful strategies we have to reduce medical error. It’s not the deus ex machina for everything, but nearly every medical error I’ve ever reviewed could have been prevented—or would have its harm minimized—had there been better communication between medical professionals and patients.

Danielle Ofri is an internal medicine physician and editor-in-chief, Bellevue Literary Review and is the author of When We Do Harm: A Doctor Confronts Medical Error. She can be reached at her self-titled site, Danielle Ofri.  

Image credit: Shutterstock.com

Prev

Traumatic grief during COVID-19

June 2, 2020 Kevin 0
…
Next

It’s OK to mourn your wedding

June 2, 2020 Kevin 0
…

Tagged as: Health IT, Primary Care

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Traumatic grief during COVID-19
Next Post >
It’s OK to mourn your wedding

More by Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD

  • Getting an appointment with primary care is the Achilles’ heel of medicine

    Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD
  • Emotional epidemiology of disease is as critical as clinical epidemiology

    Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD
  • A positive visit with a patient with chronic pain

    Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD

Related Posts

  • What does curiosity have to do with patient safety?

    Elizabeth Lerner Papautsky, PhD
  • 3 medical student tips to improve patient communication

    Subha Mohan
  • The promise of in silico drug development to improve patient outcomes

    Tanja Dowe
  • How value-based pay can worsen patient outcomes

    Matthew Hahn, MD
  • Do quality metrics really improve patient care?

    Fred N. Pelzman, MD
  • The criminalization of true medical errors is a step backwards for patient safety

    Michael Ramsay, MD

More in Physician

  • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

    Dr. Najat Fadlallah
  • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

    Ketan Desai, MD, PhD
  • It’s time for C-suite to contract directly with physicians for part-time work

    Aaron Morgenstein, MD & Corinne Sundar Rao, MD
  • From rural communities to underserved populations: How telemedicine is bridging health care gaps

    Harvey Castro, MD, MBA
  • From solidarity to co-liberation: Understanding the journey towards ending oppression

    Maiysha Clairborne, MD
  • Finding peace through surrender: a personal exploration

    Dympna Weil, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
    • Breaking the stigma: Addressing the struggles of physicians

      Jean Antonucci, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

      Dr. Najat Fadlallah | Physician
    • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

      Stella Cho | Policy
    • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

      Ketan Desai, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Lazarus: the dead man brought back to life

      William Lynes, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionizing COPD management with virtual care solutions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • What I think it means to be a medical student in the wake of AI

      Jackson J. McCue | Tech

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 2 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • Marginalized Groups May Benefit More From Decreasing Air Pollution
  • Pitolisant Safe and Effective in Children With Narcolepsy
  • Functional Neurological Disorder Emerges After COVID Infection, Vaccines
  • Neuromodulation of the Peroneal Nerve Safe for Overactive Bladder
  • Clinical Challenges: Test Your Knowledge of Atopic Dermatitis

Meeting Coverage

  • Switch to IL-23 Blocker Yields Deep Responses in Recalcitrant Plaque Psoriasis
  • Biomarkers of Response With Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Cancer
  • At-Home Topical Therapy for Molluscum Contagiosum Gets High Marks
  • Outlook for Itchy Prurigo Nodularis Continues to Improve With IL-31 Antagonist
  • AAAAI President Shares Highlights From the 2023 Meeting
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
    • Breaking the stigma: Addressing the struggles of physicians

      Jean Antonucci, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

      Dr. Najat Fadlallah | Physician
    • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

      Stella Cho | Policy
    • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

      Ketan Desai, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Lazarus: the dead man brought back to life

      William Lynes, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionizing COPD management with virtual care solutions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • What I think it means to be a medical student in the wake of AI

      Jackson J. McCue | Tech

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today iMedicalApps
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Does the EMR improve or worsen patient safety?
2 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...