Free EMR Newsletter Want to receive the latest news on EMR, Meaningful Use, ARRA and Healthcare IT sent straight to your email? Join thousands of healthcare pros who subscribe to EMR and EHR for FREE!

eClinicalWorks Warns Users About Patient Safety Risks

Posted on December 21, 2016 I Written By

Anne Zieger is veteran healthcare consultant and analyst with 20 years of industry experience. Zieger formerly served as editor-in-chief of FierceHealthcare.com and her commentaries have appeared in dozens of international business publications, including Forbes, Business Week and Information Week. She has also contributed content to hundreds of healthcare and health IT organizations, including several Fortune 500 companies. Contact her at @ziegerhealth on Twitter or visit her site at Zieger Healthcare.

EMR vendor eClinicalWorks has issued a warning to users about “potential patient safety risks” in its software, a very unusual step which is almost unheard of from vendors in this market.

If there are any meaningful care problems that could occur by using the company’s software, they could have a broad impact. According to the vendor, 115,000-odd physicians use its software, 850,000 healthcare professionals and 70,000 facilities.

Unlike many such announcements by software vendors – which typically identify, say a security vulnerability or a newly-identified bug – the press announcement on the topic is rather broad. In its press release on the subject, eClinicalWorks summarizes its goals as follows:

eCW is making this announcement to ensure that all participants in the healthcare process – clinicians, pharmacies, and patients and their family members or caregivers – are aware of key patient safety risks and are focused on the roles they can play in minimizing those risks.

But there’s certainly more. In what comes across as exasperation with providers who aren’t keeping up with advisories, eCW asks its users to implement software upgrades needed to address problems with medication management, electronic prescribing and the process of ordering tests and procedures.

Specifically, eCW notes that it needs providers to install upgrades issued back in December of last year. It also pleads with doctors to upgrade their eCW to the latest version of their software, which it issued in July of 2016, as well as asking users to upgrade to the most current version of the Multum or Medispan drug databases.

In addition to making these technical requests, eCW makes several operational suggestions, including that users should read every patient safety notice, designate a patient safety officer to serve as eCW liason, and asks providers to confirm order accuracy as well as training patients to do the same. It also urges providers to follow appropriate steps for modifying medications and to take special care with custom medications.

Then, in a particularly unusual move, the press release also speaks directly to patients, advising them to be educated about their care, to know their medications and orders and to confirm that tests performed are the right ones and med orders are accurate.

It remains to be seen how effective eCW’s public awareness strategy will be. After all, if your end users are so recalcitrant that they don’t bother to keep their critical software up to date, neither pleading nor shaming them is likely to do the trick. Plus, many users don’t upgrade EHR software because there’s a cost to upgrade the software (Not sure if eCW’s upgrades are free or not).

That being said, doctors using eClinicalWorks will have virtually no excuse they can offer if a patient is harmed by software they were privately and publicly warned to update. If its customers figure this out, perhaps fear of med mal litigation will achieve eCW’s purpose after all.

e-Prescribing: Some Considerations

Posted on February 13, 2012 I Written By

Priya Ramachandran is a Maryland based freelance writer. In a former life, she wrote software code and managed Sarbanes Oxley related audits for IT departments. She now enjoys writing about healthcare, science and technology.

I’m always in the mood for stories, which is why I love the Cases and Commentaries section on the AHRQ WebM&M site. There’re a bunch of February posts up there but the one that caught my eye was one titled E-prescribing: E for Error?

The case involved a 63 year old man who went in to see his primary care physician. He was receiving psychotherapy, but was still prone to anxiety. The PCP prescribed him alprazolam for the anxiety. Since the clinic had just implemented a new e-prescribing system, the doctor assured the patient that he didn’t need a paper prescription and just needed to show up at pharmacy and pick up his order.

So far so good.

Back at the doctor’s office, a nurse entered the presribed medication into the practice’s shiny new system, except that she inadvertently added an order of atenolol, intended for a different patient, to this patient’s order. She soon realized her mistake and deleted the atenolol order.

When the patient went to the pharmacy, he was given both the alprazolam and the atenolol, which he thought was odd, since he had been prescribed only one medication. However, he just went ahead with taking both medications per the directions handed to him by the pharmacist, and it was only a few days later, during an appointment with a cardiologist that the mistaken atenolol addition was finally identified.

Fortunately, the patient lived to tell the tale, which we all know is not the outcome in some sad cases. Elisa W. Ashton, the author of this Cases and Commentaries piece, has some great points listed as her takeaways from this case. Here are mine:

It’s too soon to say goodbye to paper. I worry about trees more than the average Jane, but if there’s a ever a case to be made for a paper prescription, here it is. A paper prescription would’ve shown up the double prescription both to the nurse, as well as the patient, making it less likely to make it to the pharmacy.

It’s not clear who/what failed. Did the nurse realize delete the wrong entry only after she transmitted the patient’s prescription? Did the prescription software trule delete the medication or simply mark it as flagged for deletion?

– This accident happened on a newish system, perhaps users were not as familiar with it as they should have been.

If you think something’s odd about your prescription, speak up. As patients many of us tend to assume that doctors know best. However, doctors are as human as everyone else, no matter how many initials tag along before or after their names. You don’t have to be obnoxious about it, it’s perfectly fine to verify politely with your doctor’s office if the additional (or missing) medications are necessary.

– Bravo to the eagle-eyed cardiologist! It was great someone caught this error in time, though I would much prefer that some kind of check system be built into the e-prescription system to prevent errors of this sort.

Go check out the post on AHRQ.