OBJECTIVE -The epidemiology of peripheral vascular disease has rarely been studied in non-European populations. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and risk factors of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) among South Indians. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -The Chennai Urban PopulationStudy is an epidemiological study involving 2 residential areas in Chennai in South India. Of the 1,399 eligible subjects (Ն20 years of age), 1,262 (90.2%) participated in the study. All of the study subjects underwent an oral glucose tolerance test and were categorized as having normal glucose tolerance (NGT), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), or diabetes. Peripheral Doppler studies were performed on 50% of the study subjects, and PVD was defined as an ankle-brachial index (ABI) Ͻ0.9.RESULTS -The prevalence rates of PVD were 2.7, 2.9, and 6.3% in individuals with NGT, IGT, and diabetes, respectively. The overall prevalence rate was 3.2%. Known diabetic subjects had a higher prevalence of PVD (7.8%) compared with newly diagnosed diabetic subjects (3.5%). PVD was uncommon until middle-age and then the prevalence rate increased dramatically. Univariate regression analysis showed age Ͼ50 years (odds ratio [OR] 6.3, 95% CI 2.1-20.6, P Ͻ 0.001) and hypertension (OR 2.7, 0.9-7.3, P = 0.08) to be associated with PVD, whereas smoking and serum lipid levels showed no association. Multivariate regression analysis identified age as the most significant risk factor for PVD. Of the 90 subjects who had coronary artery disease (CAD), only 6 had PVD, and the positive predictive value of the ABI for CAD was only 30%.CONCLUSIONS -The prevalence of PVD in this urban South Indian population is considerably lower than that reported in European and U.S. studies and is in marked contrast to the high prevalence rate of CAD reported in this population.

BackgroundElectronic health records (EHR) are becoming increasingly integrated into the clinical environment. With the rapid proliferation of EHRs, a number of studies document an increase in adverse patient safety issues due to the EHR-user interface. Because of these issues, greater attention has been placed on novel educational activities which incorporate use of the EHR. The ICU environment presents many challenges to integrating an EHR given the vast amounts of data recorded each day, which must be interpreted to deliver safe and effective care. We have used a novel EHR based simulation exercise to demonstrate that everyday users fail to recognize a majority of patient safety issues in the ICU. We now sought to determine whether participation in the simulation improves recognition of said issues.MethodsTwo ICU cases were created in our EHR simulation environment. Each case contained 14 safety issues, which differed in content but shared common themes. Residents were given 10 minutes to review a case followed by a presentation of management changes. Participants were given an immediate debriefing regarding missed issues and strategies for data gathering in the EHR. Repeated testing was performed in a cohort of subjects with the other case at least 1 week later.Results116 subjects have been enrolled with 25 subjects undergoing repeat testing. There was no difference between cases in recognition of patient safety issues (39.5% vs. 39.4%). Baseline performance for subjects who participated in repeat testing was no different than the cohort as a whole. For both cases, recognition of safety issues was significantly higher among repeat participants compared to first time participants. Further, individual performance improved from 39.9% to 63.6% (p = 0.0002), a result independent of the order in which the cases were employed. The degree of improvement was inversely related to baseline performance. Further, repeat participants demonstrated a higher rate of recognition of changes in vitals, misdosing of antibiotics and oversedation compared to first time participants.ConclusionParticipation in EHR simulation improves EHR use and identification of patient safety issues.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1472-6920-14-224) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectiveTo establish the role of high-fidelity simulation training to test the efficacy and safety of the electronic health record (EHR)–user interface within the intensive care unit (ICU) environment.DesignProspective pilot study.SettingMedical ICU in an academic medical centre.ParticipantsPostgraduate medical trainees.InterventionsA 5-day-simulated ICU patient was developed in the EHR including labs, hourly vitals, medication administration, ventilator settings, nursing and notes. Fourteen medical issues requiring recognition and subsequent changes in management were included. Issues were chosen based on their frequency of occurrence within the ICU and their ability to test different aspects of the EHR–user interface. ICU residents, blinded to the presence of medical errors within the case, were provided a sign-out and given 10 min to review the case in the EHR. They then presented the case with their management suggestions to an attending physician. Participants were graded on the number of issues identified. All participants were provided with immediate feedback upon completion of the simulation.Primary and secondary outcomesTo determine the frequency of error recognition in an EHR simulation. To determine factors associated with improved performance in the simulation.Results38 participants including 9 interns, 10 residents and 19 fellows were tested. The average error recognition rate was 41% (range 6–73%), which increased slightly with the level of training (35%, 41% and 50% for interns, residents, and fellows, respectively). Over-sedation was the least-recognised error (16%); poor glycemic control was most often recognised (68%). Only 32% of the participants recognised inappropriate antibiotic dosing. Performance correlated with the total number of screens used (p=0.03).ConclusionsDespite development of comprehensive EHRs, there remain significant gaps in identifying dangerous medical management issues. This gap remains despite high levels of medical training, suggesting that EHR-specific training may be beneficial. Simulation provides a novel tool in order to both identify these gaps as well as foster EHR-specific training.

Physicians in the 21st century will increasingly interact in diverse ways with information systems, requiring competence in many aspects of clinical informatics. In recent years, many medical school curricula have added content in information retrieval (search) and basic use of the electronic health record. However, this omits the growing number of other ways that physicians are interacting with information that includes activities such as clinical decision support, quality measurement and improvement, personal health records, telemedicine, and personalized medicine. We describe a process whereby six faculty members representing different perspectives came together to define competencies in clinical informatics for a curriculum transformation process occurring at Oregon Health & Science University. From the broad competencies, we also developed specific learning objectives and milestones, an implementation schedule, and mapping to general competency domains. We present our work to encourage debate and refinement as well as facilitate evaluation in this area.

No abstract

During interprofessional intensive care unit (ICU) rounds each member of the interprofessional team is responsible for gathering and interpreting information from the electronic health records (EHR) to facilitate effective team decision-making. This study was conducted to determine how each professional group reviews EHR data in preparation for rounds and their ability to identify patient safety issues. Twenty-five physicians, 29 nurses, and 20 pharmacists participated. Individual participants were given verbal and written sign-out and then asked to review a simulated record in our institution's EHR, which contained 14 patient safety items. After reviewing the chart, subjects presented the patient and the number of safety items recognised was recorded. About 40%, 30%, and 26% of safety issues were recognised by physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, respectively (p = 0.0006) and no item recognised 100% of the time. There was little overlap between the three groups with only 50% of items predicted to be recognised 100% of the time by the team. Differential recognition was associated with marked differences in EHR use, with only 3/152 EHR screens utilised by all three groups and the majority of screens used exclusively only by one group. There were significant and non-overlapping differences in individual profession recognition of patient safety issues in the EHR. Preferential identification of safety issues by certain professional groups may be attributed to differences in EHR use. Future studies will be needed to determine if shared decision-making during rounds can improve recognition of safety issues.

Objective Hiring medical scribes to document in the electronic health record (EHR) on behalf of providers could pose patient safety risks because scribes often have no clinical training. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of scribes on patient safety. This included identification of best practices to assure that scribe use of the EHR is not a patient safety risk. Materials and Methods Using a sociotechnical framework and the Rapid Assessment Process, we conducted ethnographic data gathering at 5 purposively selected sites. Data were analyzed using a grounded inductive/hermeneutic approach. Results We conducted site visits at 12 clinics and emergency departments within 5 organizations in the US between 2017 and 2019. We did 76 interviews with 81 people and spent 80 person-hours observing scribes working with providers. Interviewees believe and observations indicate that scribes decrease patient safety risks. Analysis of the data yielded 12 themes within a 4-dimension sociotechnical framework. Results about the “technical” dimension indicated that the EHR is not considered overly problematic by either scribes or providers. The “environmental” dimension included the changing scribe industry and need for standards. Within the “personal” dimension, themes included the need for provider diligence and training when using scribes. Finally, the “organizational” dimension highlighted the positive effect scribes have on documentation efficiency, quality, and safety. Conclusion Participants perceived risks related to the EHR can be less with scribes. If healthcare organizations and scribe companies follow best practices and if providers as well as scribes receive training, safety can actually improve.

Numerous reports describe unintended consequences of electronic health record implementation. Having previously described physicians' failures to recognize patient safety issues within our electronic health record simulation environment, we now report on our use of eye and screen-tracking technology to understand factors associated with poor error recognition during an intensive care unit-based electronic health record simulation. We linked performance on the simulation to standard eye and screen-tracking readouts including number of fixations, saccades, mouse clicks and screens visited. In addition, we developed an overall Composite Eye Tracking score which measured when, where and how often each safety item was viewed. For 39 participants, the Composite Eye Tracking score correlated with performance on the simulation (p = 0.004). Overall, the improved performance was associated with a pattern of rapid scanning of data manifested by increased number of screens visited (p = 0.001), mouse clicks (p = 0.03) and saccades (p = 0.004). Eye tracking can be successfully integrated into electronic health record-based simulation and provides a surrogate measure of cognitive decision making and electronic health record usability.