Advertisement

Effect of Patient Acuity of Illness and Nurse Experience on EMR Works in Intensive Care Unit

  • Sivamanoj Sreeramakavacham
  • Jung Hyup Kim
  • Laurel Despins
  • Megan Sommerfeldt
  • Natalie Bessette
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10917)

Abstract

The objective of this study is to analyze the impact on the nurse’s process time during the electronic medical record (EMR) charting task in an intensive care unit (ICU). The dynamic uncertainty of clinical tasks in the ICU can make it difficult for nurses to take care of critically ill patients. According to the literature, EMR documentation is one of the tasks on which nurses spend most of their time during the shift. To understand and improve the EMR documenting process, a time & motion study was conducted in a medical ICU at the University of Missouri Hospital. Data was collected on processes and standard times of every EMR activity performed by ICU nurses. Based on the results of this study, hierarchical task analysis (HTA) charts were developed and analyzed nurse’s workflow during EMR documentation. After that, a simulation model was developed for documenting in the EMR in an ICU.

Keywords

Electronic medical record systems Simulation Patient acuity level Nurse experience 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The Interdisciplinary Innovations Fund and Mizzou Advantage supported this research. We also thank nurses at the University Hospital, University of Missouri Health Care in Columbia, Missouri.

References

  1. 1.
    Haux, R., et al.: Healthcare in the information society. A prognosis for the year 2013. Int. J. Med. Inform. 66(1), 3–21 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    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. 12(5), 505–516 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ammenwerth, E., Spötl, H.: The time needed for clinical documentation versus direct patient care. Methods Inf. Med. 48(1), 84–91 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parameshwara, N., et al.: NGOMSL simulation model in an emergency department. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE Press (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Iyer, P.W., Camp, N.H.: Nursing Documentation: A Nursing Process Approach. Mosby Inc., St. Louis (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hendrich, A., et al.: A 36-hospital time and motion study: how do medical-surgical nurses spend their time? Perm. J. 12(3), 25 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hefter, Y., et al.: A time-motion study of ICU workflow and the impact of strain. Crit. Care Med. 44(8), 1482–1489 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mador, R.L., Shaw, N.T.: 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. 78(7), 435–445 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saarinen, K., Aho, M.: Does the implementation of a clinical information system decrease the time intensive care nurses spend on documentation of care? Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 49(1), 62–65 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hripcsak, G., et al.: Use of electronic clinical documentation: time spent and team interactions. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 18(2), 112–117 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bosman, R.J.: Impact of computerized information systems on workload in operating room and intensive care unit. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Anaesthesiol. 23(1), 15–26 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bian, D., et al.: A novel virtual reality driving environment for autism intervention. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (eds.) UAHCI 2013. LNCS, vol. 8010, pp. 474–483. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39191-0_52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bradshaw, K.E., et al.: Computer-based data entry for nurses in the ICU. MD Comput. Comput. Med. Pract. 6(5), 274–280 (1989)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bosman, R., et al.: Intensive care information system reduces documentation time of the nurses after cardiothoracic surgery. Intensive Care Med. 29(1), 83–90 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cheevakasemsook, A., et al.: The study of nursing documentation complexities. Int. J. Nurs. Pract. 12(6), 366–374 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Juneja, D., et al.: Comparison of newer scoring systems with the conventional scoring systems in general intensive care population. Minerva Anestesiol. 78(2), 194–200 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vincent, J., et al.: The SOFA score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 22(7), 707–710 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Frohlich, M., et al.: Which score should be used for posttraumatic multiple organ failure? - Comparison of the MODS, Denver- and SOFA- Scores. Scand. J. Trauma Resusc. Emerg. Med. 24(1), 130 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vincent, J.-L., et al.: Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care units: results of a multicenter, prospective study. Crit. Care Med. 26(11), 1793–1800 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Charlson, M.E., et al.: A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J. Chronic Dis. 40(5), 373–383 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Benner, P.: Using the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition to describe and interpret skill acquisition and clinical judgment in nursing practice and education. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 24(3), 188–199 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Song, X., Kim, J.H., Despins, L.: A Time-Motion Study in an Intensive Care Unit using the Near Field Electromagnetic Ranging System. In: Proceedings of the IIE Annual Conference. Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers (IISE) (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Miller, L., et al.: Novice nurse preparedness to effectively use electronic health records in acute care settings: critical informatics knowledge and skill gaps. Online J. Nurs. Inform. (OJNI) 18(2) (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moody, L.E., et al.: Electronic health records documentation in nursing: nurses’ perceptions, attitudes, and preferences. Comput. Inform. Nurs. (CIN) 22(6), 337–344 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leonard-Barton, D.: Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Res. Policy 17(5), 251–267 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sivamanoj Sreeramakavacham
    • 1
  • Jung Hyup Kim
    • 1
  • Laurel Despins
    • 2
  • Megan Sommerfeldt
    • 1
  • Natalie Bessette
    • 1
  1. 1.Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering DepartmentUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA
  2. 2.Sinclair School of Nursing University of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations