CASE 3 W4 OIS

CASE 3 W4 OIS Lecturer: CASE 3 W4 OIS Generally, the computerized provider ordering entry (CPOE) system will ensure that there isminimization on the number of medical errors, improve effectiveness, and guarantee efficiency. Reduction in medical errors will be achieved because cases of manual ordering, which Gardiner (2005) associates with increased chances of medication errors will be a thing of the past. In most cases, manual ordering is done amidst highly pressurized working environments that cause nurses and other health care providers to work under tiredness and fatigue. Once this happens, chance that there will be mistakes with orders, leading to medical errors becomes increased. In the same direction, the effects of manual ordering bring about inefficiency because not much is done within a short time frame. Once all these effects happen, effectiveness becomes undermined. Currently, there is an unintended effect with the CPOE, which has to do with the continuation of orders that are not explicitly discontinued by the doctor for a patient moving to a new part of the hospital.At Mount Auburn, adverse drug events (ADEs) are the largest injury category, as they account for up to 20% of total injuries (Mount Auburn Case, p. 1). The study at the hospital continues to show that there exists two major form or types of ADEs namely preventable and potential ADEs. Whereas preventable ADEs were noted to be have been resulted from correctable errors, potential ADEs were those that did not result in any injuries. Between these two types, it is expected that the implementation of the information system can lead to a reduction in both. This is because both cases of ADEs are directly attributable to human mistakes, which leads to medical errors. Since the information system will be eliminating most of the human phase of interaction with the ordering system, it is expected that all two forms of ADEs will be reduced drastically with the CPOE. At both Mount Auburn and Emory, it was noted that the CPOE system helped in bringing about standardization of care by reducing the variation of treatments and standardized care whenever possible (Emory Case, p. 7). The evidence of this major change is very glaring when the implementation of the information system is compared to moments before the implementation. For example, before the implementation, patients received preferential treatments based on the discretions of care givers. What is more, patients who were attended to at times that care givers were less tired were sure to receive the best of service than those who came when caregivers were exhausted. With the CPOE however, such preferences were absented as everything was even, fair and balanced. It is not surprising that the quality of care increased and that there was positive reception for the CPOE.The standard set at Emory and Mount Auburn can be described as good models that can be replicated in my own organization. But to do so, not everything will be copied vividly as there are different lines of problems between each organization (Olson and Desheng, 2008). In my case, three key issues that I would have given special attention to are the issues of training for end users, gradual introduction of the new system to ensure that it is made to run with the old one till users are well vest with its usage, and constant monitoring and evaluation on the system. it is expected that the monitoring and evaluation that would have been done on the system would lead to effective assessment of the system to ensure that it performs in a range and manner in which it was intended to.ReferencesGardiner, P. D. 2005. Project Management – A Strategic Planning Approach. New Yor: Palgrave Macmillan.Hamermesh et al. (2011). Computerized Provider Order Entry at Emory Healthcare. Harvard: Harvard Business School.McAfee A.F, MacGregory S. M and Benari M (2003). Mount Auburn Hospital: Physician Order Entry. Harvard: Harvard Business School.Olson D. L. amp. Desheng, D. W. 2008. Financial Engineering and Risk Management – Enterprise Risk Management, Volume 1. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte.Ltd.

You Might Also Like